[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[bug#33026] [bug#33020] Progress
From: |
Andreas Enge |
Subject: |
[bug#33026] [bug#33020] Progress |
Date: |
Thu, 7 Mar 2019 15:02:22 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.11.2 (2019-01-07) |
On Thu, Mar 07, 2019 at 02:38:28PM +0100, Tobias Geerinckx-Rice wrote:
> Do you think this is reasonable?
I do - in the spirit of dropping packages that do not build after about
two weeks, as discussed around FOSDEM. I think there is no point in keeping
orphaned patches around for packages that apparently nobody cares about
any more.
> I'm reopening this and welcome any feedback that will help get this merged.
That is fine as well, if you care about the package, that contradicts
my motivation above!
> If no-one answers in the next 2 weeks, fine.
Well, then you replace 2 weeks by twice 2 weeks, which is also fine,
but not fundamentally different from the approach that apparently
you find unreasonable.
Andreas
- bug#33020: Progress, Andreas Enge, 2019/03/07
- Message not available
- [bug#33026] [bug#33020] Progress,
Andreas Enge <=
- Message not available