On Sat, Aug 7, 2010 at 11:03 AM, Tim Abbott wrote:
> On Sat, 7 Aug 2010, William Stein wrote:
>
>> On Sat, Aug 7, 2010 at 10:49 AM, wrote:
>> > I think there are a couple new dependencies that are not in Debian; there
>> > weren't any as of version 4.0 or so. I would recommend first getting
>>
On Sat, 7 Aug 2010, William Stein wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 7, 2010 at 10:49 AM, wrote:
> > I think there are a couple new dependencies that are not in Debian; there
> > weren't any as of version 4.0 or so. I would recommend first getting
> > sagemath working building the copies contained in the sag
On Sat, Aug 7, 2010 at 10:49 AM, wrote:
> On Fri, 6 Aug 2010, kamaraju kusumanchi wrote:
>
>> > Kamaraju,
>> >
>> > Overall I like your plan. And I'd like to help.
>> >
>> > I do not like starting with version 3.0.6. I think such an old version
>> > is unlikely to attract many users and hence t
On Fri, 6 Aug 2010, kamaraju kusumanchi wrote:
> > Kamaraju,
> >
> > Overall I like your plan. And I'd like to help.
> >
> > I do not like starting with version 3.0.6. I think such an old version
> > is unlikely to attract many users and hence testing will be suboptimal.
> > In addition, upstrea
On Fri, 6 Aug 2010, kamaraju kusumanchi wrote:
> > Removing the package from unstable doesn't prevent you from working on
> > the package. It's just a way to clean up Debian. It will be very easy to
> > re-upload when you will have something that builds in i386 and amd64
> > (though it might be be
On Fri, 6 Aug 2010 18:00:19 -0400, kamaraju kusumanchi
wrote:
> Users do not want to install the latest version without knowing if
> their problem is fixed in the latest version. But if they know that
> the problem is fixed, then they make every effort to get that version.
This is reasonably eas
On 08/ 6/10 11:00 PM, kamaraju kusumanchi wrote:
My understanding is that upstream is very unhappy with the fact that
Debian is shipping an old version, as it generates support requests for
something that they don't want to support (3.0.5 was released on
2008-07-11).
If anyone has the time, I
>
> My understanding is that upstream is very unhappy with the fact that
> Debian is shipping an old version, as it generates support requests for
> something that they don't want to support (3.0.5 was released on
> 2008-07-11).
>
Right. One of the points we have drive home to the users is that if
> Kamaraju,
>
> Overall I like your plan. And I'd like to help.
>
> I do not like starting with version 3.0.6. I think such an old version
> is unlikely to attract many users and hence testing will be suboptimal.
> In addition, upstream reports that upgrading to 4.5 is currently broken
> (http://
