On Sat, 22 Jul 2017 00:51:45 -0600
Fernando Lopez wrote:
> wouldn't it be better that instead of removing packages without a
> maintainer would be better to just leave them there with maintainer
> name: "no maintainer" that way if someone wants to take over or use
> that program they could... jus
I would agree to a different branch... yes!
On Sat, Jul 22, 2017 at 12:54 AM, Daniil Bratashov wrote:
> May be move it to something like pasture archive, the main repository
> should be maintained anyway, and better no package than obsolete or broken
> package.
>
> WBR, Daniil Bratashov.
>
> On
May be move it to something like pasture archive, the main repository
should be maintained anyway, and better no package than obsolete or broken
package.
WBR, Daniil Bratashov.
On Sat, Jul 22, 2017 at 10:51 AM, Fernando Lopez wrote:
> wouldn't it be better that instead of removing packages with
wouldn't it be better that instead of removing packages without a
maintainer would be better to just leave them there with maintainer name:
"no maintainer" that way if someone wants to take over or use that program
they could... just my two cents.
On Fri, Jul 21, 2017 at 6:28 PM, Willy Sudiarto Ra
Hi all
We have added python3 support to several scripts due to changes in
previous public updates (python-requests) that it broke openshots.
Wireshark is now bumped to 2.4.0 and qt5 is the default UI, but we still
keep the old GTK interface for now. Several new optional dependencies
has been intr
