On Mon, Apr 27, 2020 at 01:22:29PM +0200, Sébastien Delafond wrote: > It was perfectly clear the first time, and this is where we can agree to > disagree.
Dear Sébastien. Yes, lets agree. > Starting on this project I had a couple of goals. Towards the original goal (getting Jami into Debian), I have reworded the cmake patch description and improved the package based on your proposed changes. - cleanup rules, add the MULTIARCH bit - more on d/copyright - cmake dependency - d/watch > As I don't intend to maintain restinio in the long run, I don't feel the > need to argue this any further, and will happily defer to Alexandre's > opinion. I acknowledge that running the tests is of importance to you. I will certainly take that into consideration. To proceed, we need restinio in NEW. If you (or anybody else follwing this conversation) wishes to help, please review and/or sponsor [1]. Looking at Alexandre's Jami package, I infer that small(er) tarballs are in his interest. I do not actually know, and if it helps, I am not going to decide how the 0.6.6 package will look like. best regards felix [1] https://salsa.debian.org/felixs-guest/restinio/-/tree/master-0.6.4