On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 4:35 AM, Dmitry Smirnov <[email protected]> wrote: > On Tuesday 15 September 2015 01:53:33 Potter, Tim wrote: >> Trying to rebuild it just now and there’s a missing package >> github-robfig-go-cache, a fork of github-pmylund-go-cache which is, >> according to github, 35 commits behind and 1 commit on top. >> >> The commit in question is here: >> >> https://github.com/robfig/go-cache/commit/9fc39e0dbf62c034ec4e45e6120fc6943 >> 3a3ec51 > >> and unfortunately it’s not compatible with the direction that >> pmylund-go-cache has taken. )-: > >> I guess this means robfig-go-cache need to be packaged alongside >> pmylund-gocache unless someone wants to port revel to use it. > > I've already opened a bug with upstream: > > https://github.com/revel/revel/issues/983 > > IMHO neither we nor they (revel) should be using unmaintained forks where it > is impossible even to report bugs...
Note that disabling issues is GitHub’s default behavior when one forks a repository. That of course neither helps you nor does it excuse the fact, but it might give you a little bit more understanding as to why one frequently stumbles over repositories with issues disabled. > > -- > All the best, > Dmitry Smirnov. > > --- > > Perhaps most ridiculous of all is the suggestion that we 'keep' our > radioactive garbage for the use of our descendants. This 'solution', I > think, requires an immediate poll of the next 20,000 generations. > -- David R. Brower > > _______________________________________________ > Pkg-go-maintainers mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-go-maintainers -- Best regards, Michael _______________________________________________ Pkg-go-maintainers mailing list [email protected] http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-go-maintainers
