From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Catonano Subject: Re: [PATCH] gnunet-svn, gnunet-gtk-svn Date: Wed, 3 Aug 2016 14:05:26 +0200 Message-ID: References: <87lh0jf9fa.fsf@we.make.ritual.n0.is> <87lh0ikl95.fsf@we.make.ritual.n0.is> <20160801222135.GA9924@solar> <877fbzh8ya.fsf@we.make.ritual.n0.is> <878twfzcnb.fsf@we.make.ritual.n0.is> <87fuqntg87.fsf@we.make.ritual.n0.is> <87a8gvtcfj.fsf@we.make.ritual.n0.is> <87popqxeh7.fsf@we.make.ritual.n0.is> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=94eb2c05af4e271e44053929a6ac Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:55465) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bUuvR-0000zz-CR for guix-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 03 Aug 2016 08:05:30 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bUuvQ-0001N0-83 for guix-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 03 Aug 2016 08:05:29 -0400 Received: from mail-io0-x229.google.com ([2607:f8b0:4001:c06::229]:33557) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bUuvQ-0001MZ-3f for guix-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 03 Aug 2016 08:05:28 -0400 Received: by mail-io0-x229.google.com with SMTP id 38so240841160iol.0 for ; Wed, 03 Aug 2016 05:05:28 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <87popqxeh7.fsf@we.make.ritual.n0.is> 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: ng0 Cc: guix-devel --94eb2c05af4e271e44053929a6ac Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 2016-08-03 13:45 GMT+02:00 ng0 : > I think the costs of maintaining a -svn of gnunet are too high at the > moment. I'm using these two packages as a base for debugging gnunet in > addition to gentoo to help work with upstream. > > A revision-less svn package does not work (unlike in gentoo), so my > focus is at the moment to help to push towards 0.10.2 release. > > Afterwards I can decide wether to include it or not, and dicuss this > with the proper attention. > If anyone else wants to contribute to this discussion you are invited > to do so. > Thank you, ng0, I will try to contribute to this discussion. Too bad, until now I had no enough time to look at the link you provided and I'm afraid I won't have time this week. But the availability of Gnunet is important for me so I will be back on this. --94eb2c05af4e271e44053929a6ac Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
2016-08-03 13:45 GMT+02:00 ng0 <ng0@we.make.ritual= .n0.is>:
I think the costs of maintaining a -svn= of gnunet are too high at the
moment. I'm using these two packages as a base for debugging gnunet in<= br> addition to gentoo to help work with upstream.

A revision-less svn package does not work (unlike in gentoo), so my
focus is at the moment to help to push towards 0.10.2 release.

Afterwards I can decide wether to include it or not, and dicuss this
with the proper attention.
If anyone else wants to contribute to this discussion you are invited
to do so.

Thank you, ng0, I will try to= contribute to this discussion.

Too bad, until now I had = no enough time to look at the link you provided and I'm afraid I won= 9;t have time this week.

But the availability of Gnunet = is important for me so I will be back on this.

--94eb2c05af4e271e44053929a6ac--