On Thu, Dec 14, 2017 at 8:24 AM,  <gro...@gentoo.org> wrote:
> If the developers of liblinebreak had not decided to rename their library, I
> could safely bump it from 2.1 to 4.0, in spite of the fact that it is
> maintainer-needed, right?
> Am I personally responsible for their decision to use the new name
> libunibreak?
> If there are QA problems in libunibreak-4.0.ebuild, they are surely shared
> by liblinebreak-2.1.ebuild (which is stable on amd64, ppc and x86, and
> ~arm). Why these problems were not cought for many years
> liblinebreak-2.1.ebuild is in the tree? (it is there from before the git
> migration, git log only shows trivial commits not changing its
> functionality)

If you are maintaining software that uses the new library, just make
yourself the maintainer.

Not sure what these "QA" issues might be; if repoman likes it, and the
ebuild works, please go ahead and re-add it.

Reply via email to