From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Leo Famulari Subject: Re: [PATCH] gnu: Add telepathy-idle. Date: Tue, 30 Aug 2016 13:53:50 -0400 Message-ID: <20160830175350.GC30380@jasmine> References: <87zinv8qx3.fsf@openmailbox.org> <20160830050353.GA25917@jasmine> <87vayi8j9g.fsf@openmailbox.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="AqsLC8rIMeq19msA" Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:56985) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1benEa-0004Qe-6P for guix-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 30 Aug 2016 13:54:05 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1benEW-0007to-6b for guix-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 30 Aug 2016 13:54:04 -0400 Received: from out4-smtp.messagingengine.com ([66.111.4.28]:38481) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1benEU-0007rL-SW for guix-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 30 Aug 2016 13:54:00 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <87vayi8j9g.fsf@openmailbox.org> List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: "Guix-devel" To: Kei Kebreau Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org --AqsLC8rIMeq19msA Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Tue, Aug 30, 2016 at 09:43:23AM -0400, Kei Kebreau wrote: > Leo Famulari writes: >=20 > > On Mon, Aug 29, 2016 at 12:45:44PM -0400, Kei Kebreau wrote: > >> Subject: [PATCH] gnu: Add telepathy-idle. > >>=20 > >> * gnu/packages/freedesktop.scm (telepathy-idle): New variable. > > > >> + (version "0.2.0") > > > > Looks good, but why use this release when there appears to be a newer > > version, 0.99.11? > > > > https://telepathy.freedesktop.org/releases/telepathy-idle/ >=20 > I'm under the impression that those are unstable versions, hence the > sudden jump in version number. Parabola GNU/Linux-libre packages this > version, so I thought it would be safe. Can you ask the upstream developers? Or poke around in their public communications to find some statement about this? --AqsLC8rIMeq19msA Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJXxcgrAAoJECZG+jC6yn8I1LMQAN+NnwadsEfUG2jadLTTbzdN cP9Walkc+oFptDWsTksV9eWjxMddQiwkhtS/IBuh3b+ClaRi1umIsJDohAFjk0OR MVDV/vSgMPNtpx2uYvtqQgHfZJx8q3HSjsEIFYKWEcrUwwzM62M0r+zEz5wgoeuI a5JTCewfw63M2rIadqy2vMRPNp+wTmZ3p02BNA4Gwn510QVb4Zn94wyXXU/oEdBo c/n36KoYQ/rUbXi4IDolGfgfuxNL58m+DM7nrTGyLbb4uy4um/PXbfqByNrA7RU5 wPw68g449UX8GCuVZ3crQaNfatGo/bkJHtJdn03EaTrKnlm1PKmj+Cw1PYGqZ0dC XksLXvhKpKnS7EGygMbPNhiZ1fUQ5DoaLfxPmvBpZ9dwkmEZTAGpLNhCoBuMxAfe KqToY15dTioDm+wh3TorwdoEwspbDkMhGZcgRk/Npdv3bHWoWCVjiqT2Zb/Is8hw eJZyKwmkHHBE6SRaiLP37obBFjxBDMDqgAm+Cvg3U4BUFE2GqAyoemsirXrohWha zKysEjifYGHo2YVW5Rp+ntUK19G9lcAA19ZWSIZXyQLZMbM0WRAw9/yRx7x+DGRI fJCmVPyIv2ytgPIiZH4j4mR8ZZT8unztE16roBGT5oPtxdJw6JByxXAdQJ315MKm MPXrutv9NtmzLBJndGKK =iOvh -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --AqsLC8rIMeq19msA--