From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Andreas Enge <andreas@enge.fr>
Subject: Re: Staying on top of Qt security
Date: Thu, 18 Feb 2016 23:59:38 +0100
Message-ID: <20160218225938.GA29487@solar>
References: <20160214200143.GA19744@jasmine> <20160218204349.GA4179@solar>
	<87egc9pr2p.fsf@dustycloud.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Return-path: <guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:60406)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <andreas@enge.fr>) id 1aWXY5-0006Fk-De
	for guix-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 18 Feb 2016 17:59:51 -0500
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <andreas@enge.fr>) id 1aWXXz-0003VM-6P
	for guix-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 18 Feb 2016 17:59:49 -0500
Received: from mailrelay7.public.one.com ([91.198.169.215]:55683)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <andreas@enge.fr>) id 1aWXXy-0003V8-Q0
	for guix-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 18 Feb 2016 17:59:43 -0500
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <87egc9pr2p.fsf@dustycloud.org>
List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution."
	<guix-devel.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/options/guix-devel>,
	<mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:guix-devel@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guix-devel>,
	<mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
Sender: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
To: Christopher Allan Webber <cwebber@dustycloud.org>
Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org

On Thu, Feb 18, 2016 at 02:53:40PM -0800, Christopher Allan Webber wrote:
> I'm assuming this was directed at me (though I don't work on Pumpa, but
> I could ask the author things... I do *use* it every day though).  What
> am I being asked here... I'm not sure?  Whether Pumpa could be updated
> to QT 5?

I think so :-)

The alternative question would have been whether we could remove it,
but I already knew the answer...

Andreas