Bug#614517: Info received (Bug#614517: Packaging of libgit2

2012-04-28 Thread Russell Sim
Hey Bálint, Bálint Réczey writes: >>> Why does the absence of 1.0 version prevent the upload to unstable? >>> There has been many 0.xx releases and the package can be blocked from >>> migration to testing if it is really not ready for being released as >>> part of Debian. >>> I would like to uplo

Bug#614517: Info received (Bug#614517: Packaging of libgit2

2012-04-25 Thread Bálint Réczey
Hi Russell, 2012/4/25 Russell Sim : > > Bálint Réczey writes: > >> Why does the absence of 1.0 version prevent the upload to unstable? >> There has been many 0.xx releases and the package can be blocked from >> migration to testing if it is really not ready for being released as >> part of Debian

Bug#614517: Info received (Bug#614517: Packaging of libgit2

2012-04-24 Thread Russell Sim
Bálint Réczey writes: > Do you plan resurrecting the package repository at GitHub? The repository is now avaliable via alioth.debian.org [1]. 1. http://anonscm.debian.org/gitweb/?p=users/arrsim-guest/libgit2.git;a=summary pgpBCsGi0toki.pgp Description: PGP signature

Bug#614517: Info received (Bug#614517: Packaging of libgit2

2012-04-24 Thread Russell Sim
Bálint Réczey writes: > Why does the absence of 1.0 version prevent the upload to unstable? > There has been many 0.xx releases and the package can be blocked from > migration to testing if it is really not ready for being released as > part of Debian. > I would like to upload a package dependin

Bug#614517: Info received (Bug#614517: Packaging of libgit2

2012-04-24 Thread Bálint Réczey
Hi Russell, Could you please ship static library in libgit2-dev? I used the attached slightly modified debian patch for generating it. Do you plan resurrecting the package repository at GitHub? Cheers, Balint 2012/4/24 Bálint Réczey : > Hi Russel, > > Why does the absence of 1.0 version prevent

Bug#614517: Info received (Bug#614517: Packaging of libgit2

2012-04-24 Thread Bálint Réczey
Hi Russel, Why does the absence of 1.0 version prevent the upload to unstable? There has been many 0.xx releases and the package can be blocked from migration to testing if it is really not ready for being released as part of Debian. I would like to upload a package depending on libgit2, thus i wo

Bug#614517: Info received (Bug#614517: Packaging of libgit2)

2012-04-21 Thread Russell Sim
Arg, I have been doing some rounds with the libgit2 mailing list to try and get subscribed, until I can get further conformation, it seems that there are plans for a 1.0 release some time after the Google summer of code [1] (so probably late 2012). Until then the library should be considered in dev

Bug#614517: Packaging of libgit2

2012-03-28 Thread Russell Sim
Hi Carlos, Sorry to keep bugging you :) you are probably more time poor that I. I thought I should mention that I am by no means a debian developer or even a maintainer for that matter. So I will be unable to upload the package my self. I don't know if you are a DD or DM so I'm not sure if I sh

Bug#614517: Packaging of libgit2

2012-03-23 Thread Russell Sim
Just thought I would give an update, I have just imported the latest revision and written a pretty raw script to automate the process. I have added some checking to detect changes in the copyright file. Cheers, Russell -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-wnpp-requ...@lists.debian.org with a su

Bug#614517: Packaging of libgit2

2012-03-22 Thread Russell Sim
Carlos Martín Nieto writes: > On Thu, 2012-03-22 at 09:15 +1100, Russell Sim wrote: >> Carlos Martín Nieto writes: >> > Another reason is that I don't know how much sense it makes to package >> > the released version, as we've made a lot of bugfixes and added >> > features since then, and during

Bug#614517: Packaging of libgit2

2012-03-22 Thread Carlos Martín Nieto
On Thu, 2012-03-22 at 09:15 +1100, Russell Sim wrote: > Carlos Martín Nieto writes: > > > Thanks for taking the time to do this. One reason I haven't advanced too > > much on this (other than a version I have locally) is the issue of the > > clay script, which I wasn't too sure was DFSG compatibl

Bug#614517: Packaging of libgit2

2012-03-21 Thread Russell Sim
Carlos Martín Nieto writes: > Thanks for taking the time to do this. One reason I haven't advanced too > much on this (other than a version I have locally) is the issue of the > clay script, which I wasn't too sure was DFSG compatible (though > re-reading the rules, it looks like I was mixing th

Bug#614517: Packaging of libgit2

2012-03-21 Thread Carlos Martín Nieto
On Tue, 2012-03-20 at 23:01 +1100, Russell Sim wrote: > Hi, > > I have been watching this bug for a while with interest. I have tried > and failed to find copies of the package referred to in a previous > email. Since then I have been maintaining my own version of libgit2 for > a library I devel

Bug#614517: Packaging of libgit2

2012-03-20 Thread Russell Sim
Hi, I have been watching this bug for a while with interest. I have tried and failed to find copies of the package referred to in a previous email. Since then I have been maintaining my own version of libgit2 for a library I develop. Recently I have had the time to enhance the packages I have b