On Thu, Dec 14, 2017 at 8:24 AM, <gro...@gentoo.org> wrote: > If the developers of liblinebreak had not decided to rename their library, I > could safely bump it from 2.1 to 4.0, in spite of the fact that it is > maintainer-needed, right? > Am I personally responsible for their decision to use the new name > libunibreak? > If there are QA problems in libunibreak-4.0.ebuild, they are surely shared > by liblinebreak-2.1.ebuild (which is stable on amd64, ppc and x86, and > ~arm). Why these problems were not cought for many years > liblinebreak-2.1.ebuild is in the tree? (it is there from before the git > migration, git log only shows trivial commits not changing its > functionality)
If you are maintaining software that uses the new library, just make yourself the maintainer. Not sure what these "QA" issues might be; if repoman likes it, and the ebuild works, please go ahead and re-add it.
