From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:43114) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1h6LV9-0005sg-P0 for guix-patches@gnu.org; Tue, 19 Mar 2019 16:38:26 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1h6LUw-0001Bq-ES for guix-patches@gnu.org; Tue, 19 Mar 2019 16:38:17 -0400 Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:37402) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1h6LSs-00070b-R6 for guix-patches@gnu.org; Tue, 19 Mar 2019 16:38:05 -0400 Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1h6LSs-0002eU-EG for guix-patches@gnu.org; Tue, 19 Mar 2019 16:36:02 -0400 Subject: [bug#34795] LXQT update to version 0.14.1 Resent-Message-ID: Mime-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <93ad3d53-6ff4-6a1f-f810-30275a3d0968@web.de> References: <20190315171929.GD32161@jasmine.lan> <93ad3d53-6ff4-6a1f-f810-30275a3d0968@web.de> Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2019 16:35:27 -0400 From: "Reza Alizadeh Majd" Content-Type: text/plain List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-patches-bounces+kyle=kyleam.com@gnu.org Sender: "Guix-patches" To: Jonathan Brielmaier , Leo Famulari Cc: 34795@debbugs.gnu.org you're right, I'd seen their commits and just had a review about differences between our changes and theirs. it seems that we also could discard our changes, and switch back to main repository changes. thanks Reza On Tue, Mar 19, 2019, at 1:28 PM, Jonathan Brielmaier wrote: > Am 16.03.19 um 09:14 schrieb Reza Alizadeh Majd: > > Thanks for your response, > > > > OK, sure, first I need to change our internal commit message formats > > to gnu style. later I will submit our LXQt patches again. > > I think that's not necessary anymore as Meiyo Peng already submitted > updates for LXQT in http://issues.guix.info/issue/34845. > > It landed in master starting with commit > 9f87e52fbb806f9ee7fd13dccb54ffe27bdf53aa > > But their seem to be at least one package which is not reproducible: > http://issues.guix.info/issue/34845#34 >