> Yeah, that was my plan. I may make one more test release. Current > cvs has a ton more messages marked with _(). A few that probably > shouldn't, and a few that probably still should.
I've integrated those. Good work! > Jason, I am going to have to remove alot of the stream << handling. :| Why? > I'm slowly going thru the existing bugs, applying simple fixes(docs, etc). > After I get most of those done, I'll do bug merging. Bug merging!? Are you going to introduce new bugs? No, please! :-) > > > Is there any place (mailing list, irc channel, etc) where you discuss > > > APT development? I belive everybody would benefit if we get closer. > > > > The list is [EMAIL PROTECTED] and I _think_ I saw a message > > indicating it was unmoderated. These days it's mostly just bug > > reports from Dan Jacobson though ;> > > Yes, I caught one of the listmasters on irc, and poked him. Btw, we could turn both lists into one, integrating the discussions. We'd probably benefit from it, getting our development closer. > > > You both are also welcome to the apt-rpm list [1], if you find it > > > interesting. We have a pretty active community of users and > > > contributors there. > > I really don't know much about deep apt internals, and am not qualified to > merge features like this. You'll get there, if you're persistent enough. :-) > > Someone else made a partial perl binding too, but I'm not sure where it > > went.. > > apt-cache show libapt-pkg-perl. Done by the perl maintainer. No.. it doesn't work.. [EMAIL PROTECTED] ~]% apt-cache show libapt-pkg-perl W: Unable to locate package libapt-pkg-perl ;-)) -- Gustavo Niemeyer [ 2AAC 7928 0FBF 0299 5EB5 60E2 2253 B29A 6664 3A0C ]
