Re: Bug#841294: Overrule maintainer of "global" to package a new upstream version

2016-10-25 Thread Wookey
On 2016-10-25 07:33 +0200, Tollef Fog Heen wrote: > ]] Ian Jackson > > > * Specifically, failed to give clear and constructive directions to > >those willing to do the work; > > I disagree with those characterisations. He's asked for clarifications > on what is broken without anything

Bug#841294: Overrule maintainer of "global" to package a new upstream version

2016-10-25 Thread Ron
On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 09:03:40AM +0200, Philip Hands wrote: > Ron writes: > > ... > > That's basically why "just nuke htags now" is starting to look like > > a viable, and even sensible, option. But it's tricky to know who > > might be upset by that - and we don't have a

Bug#841294: Overrule maintainer of "global" to package a new upstream version

2016-10-25 Thread Wei Liu
On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 6:29 AM, Tollef Fog Heen wrote: > ]] Wei Liu > >> On Tue, 25 Oct 2016 05:47:27 +1030 Ron wrote: >> [...] >> > That's basically why "just nuke htags now" is starting to look like >> > a viable, and even sensible, option. But it's tricky to

Bug#841294: Overrule maintainer of "global" to package a new upstream version

2016-10-25 Thread Philip Hands
Philip Hands writes: ... > How viable is it to have two conflicting packages: > > global5: continuing as you have it now >(perhaps with patches to make it work for recent use cases) > > global6: (with htags support removed) Ah, I see -- I had somehow got the

Bug#841294: Overrule maintainer of "global" to package a new upstream version

2016-10-25 Thread Philip Hands
Ron writes: ... > That's basically why "just nuke htags now" is starting to look like > a viable, and even sensible, option. But it's tricky to know who > might be upset by that - and we don't have a clear idea of exactly > what we'd really gain elsewhere from that tradeoff,

Bug#841294: Overrule maintainer of "global" to package a new upstream version

2016-10-25 Thread Punit Agrawal
On Sun, Oct 23, 2016 at 7:49 AM, Ron wrote: > On Sat, Oct 22, 2016 at 05:41:54PM +0200, Vincent Bernat wrote: >> ❦ 22 octobre 2016 14:44 +1030, Ron : >> [...] > > Without repeating what I already said above about this option, we do > already have some

Bug#841294: Overrule maintainer of "global" to package a new upstream version

2016-10-25 Thread Vincent Bernat
❦ 25 octobre 2016 07:33 +0200, Tollef Fog Heen  : >> * Specifically, failed to give clear and constructive directions to >>those willing to do the work; > > I disagree with those characterisations. He's asked for clarifications > on what is broken without anything resembling