On 14.02.2013 16:54, Marcin Banasiak wrote:
2013/2/14 Elan Ruusamäe:
how gtkspell 3.x should be packaged?
I think that we should upgrade gtkspell.spec to 3.x and create
gtkspell2.spec for 2.x. Sooner or later packages that depend on 2.x
will be ported to the new API and then we can simply remove gtkspell2.
seems upstream tarball name is gtkspell3, library names gtkspell3-3.pc
etc, seems better to clone current to gtkspell3 ...
so, either way is fine to me, somebody just has to say which way :)
also, when somebody creates gtkspell2, does he know how to drop commits
that are with 3.x, i.e "git reset --hard SHA1", or he will just clone
whatever version is there and apply reverse patch? so, i'm afraid people
behave like option b) therefore i'd clone the package to gtkspell3 now.
--
glen
_______________________________________________
pld-devel-en mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.pld-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/pld-devel-en
