On Sat, 8 Feb 2020 20:25:35 -0500 Sandro Tosi wrote:
> There *are* cases where it makes sense, the one that comes to mind is
> moin: wiki.d.o uses that software and we're in no position to switch
> to a different wiki engine; moin hasnt been ported to python3 yet
> (likely it wont) so it is
There doesn't seem to be any interest in actually working on this package, so
I'm going to go ahead with the removal. If the rdepends are going to make it
back into Testing, it should be after switching to python3, so this package
won't be needed.
Scott K
On Monday, February 17, 2020 5:58:14 PM EST Adrian Bunk wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 17, 2020 at 12:05:59PM -0500, Scott Kitterman wrote:
> > Here's a thought:
> >
> > Given the concern Adrian has expressed relative to tahoe-lafs, how about
> > if
> > someone uploads the relevant packages to
On Mon, Feb 17, 2020 at 12:05:59PM -0500, Scott Kitterman wrote:
> Here's a thought:
>
> Given the concern Adrian has expressed relative to tahoe-lafs, how about if
> someone uploads the relevant packages to experimental:
>
> python-txsocksx -> foolscap -> tahoe-lafs
>
> Then the Unstable rm
Here's a thought:
Given the concern Adrian has expressed relative to tahoe-lafs, how about if
someone uploads the relevant packages to experimental:
python-txsocksx -> foolscap -> tahoe-lafs
Then the Unstable rm can go forward, but in the event python2 stays in the
bullseye release, it's easy
On Sat, Feb 08, 2020 at 08:25:35PM -0500, Sandro Tosi wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 7, 2020 at 6:37 AM Adrian Bunk wrote:
> > On Thu, Feb 06, 2020 at 09:20:31PM -0500, Sandro Tosi wrote:
> > > On Sun, Feb 2, 2020 at 6:51 AM Adrian Bunk wrote:
> > > > On Tue, Jan 28, 2020 at 04:06:28PM -0500, Sandro Tosi
On Fri, Feb 7, 2020 at 6:37 AM Adrian Bunk wrote:
>
> On Thu, Feb 06, 2020 at 09:20:31PM -0500, Sandro Tosi wrote:
> > On Sun, Feb 2, 2020 at 6:51 AM Adrian Bunk wrote:
> > >
> > > On Tue, Jan 28, 2020 at 04:06:28PM -0500, Sandro Tosi wrote:
> > > >...
> > > > python-txsocksx -> foolscap ->
On Thu, Feb 06, 2020 at 09:20:31PM -0500, Sandro Tosi wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 2, 2020 at 6:51 AM Adrian Bunk wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Jan 28, 2020 at 04:06:28PM -0500, Sandro Tosi wrote:
> > >...
> > > python-txsocksx -> foolscap -> tahoe-lafs
> > >
> > > both foolscap and tahoe-lafs were removed from
On Sun, Feb 2, 2020 at 6:51 AM Adrian Bunk wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jan 28, 2020 at 04:06:28PM -0500, Sandro Tosi wrote:
> >...
> > python-txsocksx -> foolscap -> tahoe-lafs
> >
> > both foolscap and tahoe-lafs were removed from testing, so to my
> > script python-txsocksx appears as a leaf package (as
On Tue, Jan 28, 2020 at 04:06:28PM -0500, Sandro Tosi wrote:
>...
> python-txsocksx -> foolscap -> tahoe-lafs
>
> both foolscap and tahoe-lafs were removed from testing, so to my
> script python-txsocksx appears as a leaf package (as its removal wont
> break already broken/RC packages not in
Source: txsocksx
Severity: serious
Hello,
i think txsocksx should be removed from debian:
* python2-only
* upstream is not progressing on the py3k porting:
https://github.com/habnabit/txsocksx/issues/19
* leaf package
if i dont hear back within a week with a good reason to keep this package,
11 matches
Mail list logo
