> On Jan 30, 2016, at 3:34 PM, Alexander Hansen
> wrote:
>
>
>> On Jan 30, 2016, at 08:31, David Lowe wrote:
>>
>> So i was looking into updating the currently unmaintained Audacious
>> package. We have version 2.2, upstream has 3.7. Since our package names
>> actually start with "a
> On Jan 30, 2016, at 08:31, David Lowe wrote:
>
> So i was looking into updating the currently unmaintained Audacious
> package. We have version 2.2, upstream has 3.7. Since our package names
> actually start with "audacious2", would it be better to make the new package
> set as auda
So i was looking into updating the currently unmaintained Audacious
package. We have version 2.2, upstream has 3.7. Since our package names
actually start with "audacious2", would it be better to make the new package
set as audacious3-*?
sent from Mountain Lion
The Doctor: Your speci
