As a macports maintainer myself, as well as someone who is on the Apache httpd
project itself, I volunteer to help out with this.
--
Jim Jagielski
Brief? Mobile
> On Mar 3, 2016, at 7:29 PM, Marius Schamschula wrote:
>
> I agree that it’s time to do something about apache. The tick
Yeah, I've made the request but haven't heard back.
--
Jim Jagielski
Brief? Mobile
> On Sep 1, 2014, at 7:13 PM, Blair Zajac wrote:
>
> I had to explicitly request it since I was impatient ;) Sometimes I think
> the MacPorts leaders look who has earned c
How long does it take to get commit. I've been waiting for many moons as
maintainer of rsync.
--
Jim Jagielski
Brief? Mobile
> On Sep 1, 2014, at 6:24 PM, Blair Zajac wrote:
>
> Hello Martin,
>
> If you have commit rights, go ahead and commit your change. Add yoursel
You will notice that only the ldflags option was added, and this was due to
changes between 3.0.9 and 3.1.1 (actually 3.1.0) and zlib
On Mon, Jun 23, 2014 at 4:37 PM, MacPorts wrote:
> #44117: rsync: update to 3.1.1
> ---+-
> Reporter: jimj
3.1.1 will contain the fix, which is related to xattrs
On Sun, Feb 9, 2014 at 7:02 PM, MacPorts wrote:
> #40803: Rsync 3.1.0 released
> --+--
> Reporter: jones@... | Owner: jimjag@...
> Type: update | Status: new
> Priority: Nor
If you'd like help, let me know. In the meantime, I'm simply not bothering
anymore.
On Mon, Aug 19, 2013 at 4:56 PM, Lawrence Velázquez wrote:
> On Aug 19, 2013, at 4:40 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>
> > Here is the proposed subversion17 port (updated for svn 1.7.11)...
&g
On Mon, Aug 19, 2013 at 5:04 PM, Daniel J. Luke wrote:
>
>
>
> As far as the port that was added to this thread, that's not a way to get
a port into macports.
>
Who said it was?
>
> I've also mentioned (a few times), that this effort would likely be
better spent getting git-svn working with subv
Here is the proposed subversion17 port (updated for svn 1.7.11)...
On Mon, Aug 19, 2013 at 7:42 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
> It seems to me that this is *still* an issue... No further development
> upstream has been done to address this, afaict, so where does that leave us?
>
>
It seems to me that this is *still* an issue... No further development
upstream has been done to address this, afaict, so where does that leave us?
I repeat my offer to maintain subversion1.7
On Mon, Aug 5, 2013 at 8:15 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
> Look for posts regarding how svn 1.8
gt; On Aug 2, 2013, at 10:04 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>
> > Looking over some of the threads related to this on the git and svn
> lists,
> > I don't think so :)
>
> Could you point us to some of these threads? I'm trying to find them, with
> little success.
You need to downgrade to subversion 1.7 and force git-core to not require
"the latest".
You also need to watch the perl-bindings as well, and make sure they are
against 1.7 and not 1.8
On Sat, Aug 3, 2013 at 5:20 PM, Adam Mercer wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 3, 2013 at 9:50 AM, Jim Jag
Yeppers.
--
Jim Jagielski
Brief? Mobile
On Aug 2, 2013, at 10:30 PM, Adam Mercer wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 2, 2013 at 8:40 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>> I'm thinking it makes sense to break out the subversion port to svn17 and
>> svn18, since git-svn only appears to work reli
On Fri, Aug 2, 2013 at 10:01 AM, Daniel J. Luke wrote:
> On Aug 2, 2013, at 9:40 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
> > I'm thinking it makes sense to break out the subversion port to svn17
> and svn18, since git-svn only appears to work reliably with subversion 1.7.
>
> might
I'll take it on, at least until git-svn no longer requires 1.7... Sound OK?
On Fri, Aug 2, 2013 at 10:01 AM, Daniel J. Luke wrote:
> On Aug 2, 2013, at 9:40 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
> > I'm thinking it makes sense to break out the subversion port to svn17
> and svn
I'm thinking it makes sense to break out the subversion port to svn17 and
svn18, since git-svn only appears to work reliably with subversion 1.7. As
it is now, git-core +svn "forces" the use of svn 1.8.
Comments?
___
macports-dev mailing list
macports-de
On Fri, Aug 2, 2013 at 12:24 AM, Blair Zajac wrote:
>
> Out of curiosity, why do people care about universal builds? So they can
> rsync a build to another platform? Just trying to understand the
> ramifications of this change.
>
>
Up until 2.2.0, I built everything +universal, but only because
16 matches
Mail list logo
