Re: Digikam 5.0.0 uploaded
On Sunday 10 July 2016 14:01:04 Steve M. Robbins wrote: > 2. The configuration files are in a new location, but digikam does no > migration [1]. To the user, it appears you are starting from scratch and > there is a risk of confusion -- the referenced bug is from someone who > thought (mistakenly) that a migration procedure was required. The bug also > references possibly using a KF5 function KConfig::copyTo() to migrate the > files, but then concludes that some digikam 4 settings cause digikam 5 to > crash. At this point, it seems that automatic migration is unsafe but that > the initial configuration wizard should be augmented with text that > describes the upgrade- from-4.x scenario better. I'm seeking suggestions > on what might be the best approach here. Go slap upstream with this: https://api.kde.org/frameworks/kcoreaddons/html/classKdelibs4ConfigMigrator.html and if they have specific keys that are bad in the config, they hsould fix the digikam code to handle it. /Sune -- I didn’t stop pretending when I became an adult, it’s just that when I was a kid I was pretending that I fit into the rules and structures of this world. And now that I’m an adult, I pretend that those rules and structures exist. - zefrank -- http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-kde-talk
Digikam 5.0.0 uploaded
Hi, I wanted to make people aware that I have uploaded Digikam 5.0.0 packages to Debian earlier today. I uploaded to experimental for staging for a few reasons: 1. To work through the build issues on various architectures. 2. The configuration files are in a new location, but digikam does no migration [1]. To the user, it appears you are starting from scratch and there is a risk of confusion -- the referenced bug is from someone who thought (mistakenly) that a migration procedure was required. The bug also references possibly using a KF5 function KConfig::copyTo() to migrate the files, but then concludes that some digikam 4 settings cause digikam 5 to crash. At this point, it seems that automatic migration is unsafe but that the initial configuration wizard should be augmented with text that describes the upgrade- from-4.x scenario better. I'm seeking suggestions on what might be the best approach here. 3. The showfoto internationalized docs are missing due to an upstream bug [2]. The bug is now patched upstream; however, the fix re-structures the source tarball so it is unclear whether this is easy to port into the current version; or better to wait for upstream 5.1.0 source tarball. Thanks, -Steve [1] https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=364258 [2] https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=365135 signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. -- http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-kde-talk
Re: Bug#810124: digikam: Does not show albums until kbuildsycoca is manually called
On Saturday 09 January 2016 15:01:19 Steve M. Robbins wrote: > Hi, > > I recently picked up maintenance of digikam and haven't finished ramping up > on KDE internals... > > I received the following bug report. I haven't noticed this problem myself, > so it makes me wonder: > > 1. When, typically, is kbuildsyscoca run? The man page and google were > unhelpful so far. This problem is in general only seen when using KDE's complex applications outside plasma 4. in the 4 series: In general, it is run by kded as needed, including on kded startup if needed. (there is both some timestamp checking on kded startup, as well as kded is having a file system watcher on the relevant directories) I think digikam run outside a KDE Plasma environment will start kded that should trigger a rebuild of sycoca, but digikam might try to access sycoca before it has been recreated (and thus can't find what it wants) in the KF5 series The applications rebuilds sycoca as needed with a bit of magic to ensure that it is not run too much, including filesystem watchers and timestamp checking and small delays and file locking and ... But much of sycoca has been actually removed in the 5 series due to various other changes. I don't think there is much to do to actually change this from a packaging perspective, especially not since everything should be much nicer in the KF5 based world that is coming up with a better daemon control, more modularization and less magic of that kind. (we iirc have a couple of similar bug reports open against other packages - another workaround is to just start the application once more) > 2. Is it true that "other Debian KDE packages" run kbuildsyscocoa4 -- > noincremental on installation? No. Sycoca (system configuration cache) lives in user directories, so having maintscripts do that would not really work. Oh. and sycoca is btw, a binary cache of desktop files in the system and relevant user directories, as well as various configuration file locations to ensure every application doesn't need to browse thru hundreds of desktop files across multiple locations to find e.g. the plugins it is looking for. Hope this helps, and I'm happy to expand on any of the points. /Sune -- I didn’t stop pretending when I became an adult, it’s just that when I was a kid I was pretending that I fit into the rules and structures of this world. And now that I’m an adult, I pretend that those rules and structures exist. - zefrank -- http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-kde-talk
Re: Bug#810124: digikam: Does not show albums until kbuildsycoca is manually called
Sune, Thank you! That was a very, very helpful summary. On January 10, 2016 11:44:40 AM Sune Vuorela wrote: > (we iirc have a couple of similar bug reports open against other packages - > another workaround is to just start the application once more) OK, so it would be appropriate for me to simply close the bug, noting the workaround is to "quit and re-start digikam". Agree? Thanks, -Steve signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. -- http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-kde-talk
Re: Bug#810124: digikam: Does not show albums until kbuildsycoca is manually called
Hi, I recently picked up maintenance of digikam and haven't finished ramping up on KDE internals... I received the following bug report. I haven't noticed this problem myself, so it makes me wonder: 1. When, typically, is kbuildsyscoca run? The man page and google were unhelpful so far. 2. Is it true that "other Debian KDE packages" run kbuildsyscocoa4 -- noincremental on installation? Thanks, -Steve On January 6, 2016 07:05:51 PM you wrote: > Package: digikam > Version: 4:4.14.0-3 > Severity: important > Tags: patch > > Dear Maintainer, > > after installing digikam, no existing albums could be viewed. The error > message was: > > Couldn't create slave: "Unable to create io-slave: > klauncher said: Unknown protocol: digikamdates > > After calling > kbuildsycoca4 --noincremental > and > kbuildsycoca5 --noincremental > everything worked as expected. I didn't test it, but I assume, that the > latter command has been unnecessary, as digikamdates.protocol is located > in the KDE4 directory (/usr/share/kde4/services/). > > So please call > kbuildsycoca4 --noincremental > after normal package installation (as it is done in other Debian KDE > packages, although I do not know how it is done exactly). > > Kind regards > Patrick > > > -- System Information: > Debian Release: stretch/sid > APT prefers testing > APT policy: (900, 'testing'), (800, 'stable'), (500, 'unstable-debug'), > (400, 'unstable'), (1, 'experimental') Architecture: amd64 (x86_64) > > Kernel: Linux 4.3.0-1-amd64 (SMP w/4 CPU cores) > Locale: LANG=de_DE.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=de_DE.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8) > Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash > Init: systemd (via /run/systemd/system) > > Versions of packages digikam depends on: > ii digikam-data4:4.14.0-3 > ii digikam-private-libs4:4.14.0-3 > ii kde-runtime 4:15.08.3-1 > ii libc6 2.21-6 > ii libgcc1 1:5.3.1-4 > ii libgphoto2-62.5.9-3 > ii libgphoto2-port12 2.5.9-3 > ii libkdcraw23 4:15.08.0-1+b1 > ii libkdecore5 4:4.14.14-1+b1 > ii libkdeui5 4:4.14.14-1+b1 > ii libkexiv2-114:15.04.3-1 > ii libkhtml5 4:4.14.14-1+b1 > ii libkio5 4:4.14.14-1+b1 > ii libkipi11 4:15.08.3-1 > ii libknotifyconfig4 4:4.14.14-1+b1 > ii libkparts4 4:4.14.14-1+b1 > ii libopencv-core2.4v5 2.4.9.1+dfsg-1.2 > ii libopencv-imgproc2.4v5 2.4.9.1+dfsg-1.2 > ii libphonon4 4:4.8.3-2 > ii libqt4-dbus 4:4.8.7+dfsg-5 > ii libqt4-sql 4:4.8.7+dfsg-5 > ii libqt4-sql-sqlite 4:4.8.7+dfsg-5 > ii libqt4-xml 4:4.8.7+dfsg-5 > ii libqtcore4 4:4.8.7+dfsg-5 > ii libqtgui4 4:4.8.7+dfsg-5 > ii libsolid4 4:4.14.14-1+b1 > ii libstdc++6 5.3.1-4 > ii libthreadweaver44:4.14.14-1+b1 > ii perl5.22.1-3 > ii phonon 4:4.8.3-2 > > Versions of packages digikam recommends: > ii chromium [www-browser] 46.0.2490.71-1 > ii iceweasel [www-browser] 43.0.2-1+b1 > ii kipi-plugins 4:4.14.0-3 > ii konqueror [www-browser] 4:15.08.3-1 > ii mplayerthumbs4:15.08.3-1 > ii w3m [www-browser]0.5.3-26 > > Versions of packages digikam suggests: > pn digikam-doc > ii systemsettings 4:5.4.3-1 > > -- no debconf information signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. -- http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-kde-talk
Re: Building DigiKam 4.14 with libkgeomanip and other former "extras"
Hi Steve, On Sun, Dec 27, 2015 at 12:08:45PM -0600, Steve M. Robbins wrote: > DigiKam itself currently uses (Qt4-version) libqtwebkit-dev. I saw the bug > about it and the web page https://wiki.debian.org/Qt4WebKitRemoval > What I haven't seen is a precise time for this. The schedule for Digikam 5 > release is May, so I (hopefully) won't need to care after that. Is the webkit > going to be removed before next May? Actually I would like it to be removed before May. I am going to bump bugs severities to important soon (in January) and make them RC a couple of months after that (i.e. in March) to get the packages removed from testing (or fixed). I am also going to remove the PyQt5 QtWebKit bindings very soon (in a couple of weeks). So maybe it's not the best idea to introduce a new package using QtWebKit. Lisandro, you did not reply to this part of Steve's message, what do you think? -- Dmitry Shachnev signature.asc Description: PGP signature -- http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-kde-talk
Re: Building DigiKam 4.14 with libkgeomanip and other former "extras"
Just for clarity: I'm talking about digikam not a new package. On December 28, 2015 6:07:12 AM CST, Dmitry Shachnev <mity...@debian.org> wrote: >Hi Steve, > >On Sun, Dec 27, 2015 at 12:08:45PM -0600, Steve M. Robbins wrote: >> DigiKam itself currently uses (Qt4-version) libqtwebkit-dev. I saw >the bug >> about it and the web page https://wiki.debian.org/Qt4WebKitRemoval >> What I haven't seen is a precise time for this. The schedule for >Digikam 5 >> release is May, so I (hopefully) won't need to care after that. Is >the webkit >> going to be removed before next May? > >Actually I would like it to be removed before May. I am going to bump >bugs >severities to important soon (in January) and make them RC a couple of >months >after that (i.e. in March) to get the packages removed from testing (or >fixed). > >I am also going to remove the PyQt5 QtWebKit bindings very soon (in a >couple >of weeks). > >So maybe it's not the best idea to introduce a new package using >QtWebKit. > >Lisandro, you did not reply to this part of Steve's message, what do >you think? > >-- >Dmitry Shachnev > > > > >-- >http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-kde-talk -- Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.-- http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-kde-talk
Re: Building DigiKam 4.14 with libkgeomanip and other former "extras"
Hi Steve, On Mon, Dec 28, 2015 at 07:30:52AM -0600, Steve Robbins wrote: > Just for clarity: I'm talking about digikam not a new package. Oh, I missed the fact that digikam is already depending on qtwebkit. Then, indeed, please ignore my message and go ahead (as Lisandro said). -- Dmitry Shachnev signature.asc Description: PGP signature -- http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-kde-talk
Re: Building DigiKam 4.14 with libkgeomanip and other former "extras"
On Monday 28 December 2015 15:07:12 Dmitry Shachnev wrote: > Hi Steve, > > On Sun, Dec 27, 2015 at 12:08:45PM -0600, Steve M. Robbins wrote: > > DigiKam itself currently uses (Qt4-version) libqtwebkit-dev. I saw the > > bug > > about it and the web page https://wiki.debian.org/Qt4WebKitRemoval > > What I haven't seen is a precise time for this. The schedule for Digikam > > 5 > > release is May, so I (hopefully) won't need to care after that. Is the > > webkit going to be removed before next May? > > Actually I would like it to be removed before May. I am going to bump bugs > severities to important soon (in January) and make them RC a couple of > months after that (i.e. in March) to get the packages removed from testing > (or fixed). > > I am also going to remove the PyQt5 QtWebKit bindings very soon (in a couple > of weeks). > > So maybe it's not the best idea to introduce a new package using QtWebKit. > > Lisandro, you did not reply to this part of Steve's message, what do you > think? We need a kf5-based kdepim in unstable first. I was told that current packages in experimental are not ready for unstable yet. -- When the winds of change are blowing, some people are building shelters, and others are building windmills. Old Chinese Proverb Lisandro Damián Nicanor Pérez Meyer http://perezmeyer.com.ar/ http://perezmeyer.blogspot.com/ signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. -- http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-kde-talk
Re: Building DigiKam 4.14 with libkgeomanip and other former "extras"
On Monday 28 December 2015 15:40:14 Lisandro Damián Nicanor Pérez Meyer wrote: [snip] > We need a kf5-based kdepim in unstable first. I was told that current > packages in experimental are not ready for unstable yet. For what it's worth digikam is already in the archive, so just go ahead Steve. -- Programming is really just the mundane aspect of expressing a solution to a problem. There are talents that are specifically related to actually coding, but the real issue is being able to grasp problems and devise solutions that are detailed enough to actually be coded. John Carmack answers on Slashdot, http://slashdot.org/games/99/10/15/1012230.shtml Lisandro Damián Nicanor Pérez Meyer http://perezmeyer.com.ar/ http://perezmeyer.blogspot.com/ signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. -- http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-kde-talk
Re: Building DigiKam 4.14 with libkgeomanip and other former "extras"
On Sunday 27 December 2015 12:08:45 Steve M. Robbins wrote: > Hi, > > Thanks a lot to all who responded. I sense a strong feeling against > introducing new Qt4-based packages right now. And this makes sense to me. > > Given that my only motivation for a Qt4 version of these libraries is for > DigiKam 4.x, I will propose instead to avoid the new library packages by > bundling the sources into digikam. This is, essentially, returning to the > situation with DigiKam 4.4, which included sources for the following: > libkdcraw libkexiv2 libkface libkgeomap libkipi libksane libkvkontakte > libmediawiki. Some of these are currently in the archive as Qt4 versions > and some are not. My strategy would be to bundle the minimum necessary. > > I know the Debian stance on "convenience" copies of libraries, but in this > case (a) no-one wants or needs a new Qt4 version of these libraries, and (b) > it is temporary as DigiKam 4.x is going away within 6 months. > > Let me know if you have a better idea. I would simply say: ship it. I think that in this *very specific* case it's the right way to go. -- 15: Que es el "Correo Electronico" * El correo que te llega por la corriente Damian Nadales http://mx.grulic.org.ar/lurker/message/20080307.141449.a70fb2fc.es.html Lisandro Damián Nicanor Pérez Meyer http://perezmeyer.com.ar/ http://perezmeyer.blogspot.com/ signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. -- http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-kde-talk
Re: Building DigiKam 4.14 with libkgeomanip and other former "extras"
On Tuesday 22 December 2015 15:52:00 Dmitry Shachnev wrote: > Hi Scott, > > On Tue, Dec 22, 2015 at 07:08:06AM -0500, Scott Kitterman wrote: > > It's not a new package. It was just behind several releases and the > > question was to either update to the last Qt4 release or an unreleased Qt5 > > version. > > By “new package” I meant kgeomanip, which was never packaged. As long as it doesn't depends on qtwebkit we should be fine. Steve: if you need to add it just go ahead please. As you said Digikam is expected to switch to Qt5 later next year so it's worth the effort. Thanks a lot for your time on it! -- En 1975, a los 99 años, muere Leonor Acevedo de Borges. En el velorio, una mujer da el pésame a Borges y comenta: "Pobre Leonorcita, morirse tan poquito antes de cumplir los 100 años. Si hubiera esperado un poquito más...". Borges responde: "Veo, señora, que es usted devota del sistema decimal". Jorge Luis Borges, en "Borges habla de su madre". http://2tu.us/2i7d Lisandro Damián Nicanor Pérez Meyer http://perezmeyer.com.ar/ http://perezmeyer.blogspot.com/ signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. -- http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-kde-talk
Re: Building DigiKam 4.14 with libkgeomanip and other former "extras"
On Tuesday, December 22, 2015 03:52:00 PM Dmitry Shachnev wrote: > Hi Scott, > > On Tue, Dec 22, 2015 at 07:08:06AM -0500, Scott Kitterman wrote: > > It's not a new package. It was just behind several releases and the > > question was to either update to the last Qt4 release or an unreleased Qt5 > > version. > > By “new package” I meant kgeomanip, which was never packaged. Ah. That's a bit different. I still think it's not a problem if a Qt5 version is coming soon. Scott K -- http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-kde-talk
Re: Building DigiKam 4.14 with libkgeomanip and other former "extras"
[Since the conversation is now Debian-specific, I trimmed digikam-devel] On December 21, 2015 12:54:46 PM Lisandro Damián Nicanor Pérez Meyer wrote: > On Sunday 20 December 2015 17:22:07 Steve M. Robbins wrote: > > Question 1: Given that I'm building DigiKam 4.x, I presume I'll need a > > KDE4/Qt4 version of each extra. Is that the case? > > It should be, you can't mix Qt4 and Qt5 OK. Thanks for confirming. > > Question 2: If I can't use the latest kface, should I just go backwards in > > time to find the last release using KDE4 and use that with DigiKam? > > I'm afraid yes. > > Another solution could be to just build the 5.0.0 beta2 which, if I'm not > mistaken, uses Qt5/KF5. And maybe push it to experimental. I am aware of 5.x betas. I hesitate to use them right now because of the "beta" status. The announcement post itself [1] says "This version is for testing purposes. It’s not currently advised to use it in production." Maybe this is overcautious? Opinions welcome. If we do stick with the stable branch, we are probably stuck with it until next May [2]. So now the question is: for the "former extras" build-deps -- how do we co-exist the KDE4 and KF5 versions? Can the lib packages be made co-installable? Is there a package naming convention? From a quick build of libkface 15.04 (KDE4) and 15.12 (KF5) I can see the libraries are named differently (libkface.so / libKF5KFace.so). This gives me hope that at least the libs can remain co-installable. Additionally, the includes are in separate sub-dirs of /usr/include so maybe even the -dev packages can be co-installable? Thoughts / advice? Thanks, -Steve [1] https://www.digikam.org/node/749 [2] https://www.digikam.org/about/releaseplan signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. -- http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-kde-talk
Re: Digikam
On Sun, Dec 20, 2015 at 11:21:05AM -0600, Steve M. Robbins wrote: > The permissions on files in the hooks directory are a bit odd; most are owned > by root, but some have different owners. I suspect someone may have edited > files directly in the past rather than relying on committing to "pkg- > kde/scripts". In this specific instance, the file is not writeable by the > group, which may be why your update was missed: I think that ACL is used for ownership information, which means what you see in `ls` is not always what you get, $ getfacl `pwd` getfacl: Removing leading '/' from absolute path names # file: svn/pkg-kde/hooks # owner: root # group: scm_pkg-kde # flags: -s- user::rwx group::rwx group:pkg-kde:rwx group:scm_pkg-kde:rwx mask::rwx other::r-x default:user::rwx default:group::rwx default:group:pkg-kde:rwx default:group:scm_pkg-kde:rwx default:mask::rwx default:other::r-x Cheers, Adam -- Adam Majer ad...@zombino.com -- http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-kde-talk
Re: Digikam
On Sunday 20 December 2015 11:21:05 Steve M. Robbins wrote: > Hi Lisandro, > > On December 20, 2015 01:18:31 PM Lisandro Damián Nicanor Pérez Meyer wrote: > > On Saturday 19 December 2015 23:58:34 Steve M. Robbins wrote: > > > I found the config file (commit-access-control.cfg). Who is able to > > > edit > > > this for me? > > > > I have just added you, just ping me if you still get problems. > > I see your change to svn+ssh://s...@svn.debian.org/svn/pkg-kde/scripts/svn- > hooks/commit-access-control.cfg. I think this access control list is really a relic from the past that we should just disable. Unless there is significant pushback, I'll likely do it in the beginning of next year. /Sune -- I didn’t stop pretending when I became an adult, it’s just that when I was a kid I was pretending that I fit into the rules and structures of this world. And now that I’m an adult, I pretend that those rules and structures exist. - zefrank -- http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-kde-talk
Re: Digikam
On Saturday 19 December 2015 23:58:34 Steve M. Robbins wrote: > On December 15, 2015 02:17:51 PM Lisandro Damián Nicanor Pérez Meyer wrote: > > Hi Steve! I'm writing you because you said you wanted to maintain digikam. > > > > The last active maintainers where Pino Toscano and Mark Purcell. I think > > digikam is currently maintained on svn, > > Hi, > > I have got a new version of digikam ready to go, but the svn commit failed: > > svn: E165001: Commit failed (details follow): > svn: E165001: Commit blocked by pre-commit hook (exit code 1) with > output: > /svn/pkg-kde/hooks/commit-access-control.pl: user `smr' does not have > permission to commit to these paths: > kde-extras/digikam/trunk/debian > ... etc ... > > I found the config file (commit-access-control.cfg). Who is able to edit > this for me? I have just added you, just ping me if you still get problems. Thanks! -- Bebe a bordo (pero con moderación) Lisandro Damián Nicanor Pérez Meyer http://perezmeyer.com.ar/ http://perezmeyer.blogspot.com/ signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. -- http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-kde-talk
Re: Digikam
Hi Lisandro, On December 20, 2015 01:18:31 PM Lisandro Damián Nicanor Pérez Meyer wrote: > On Saturday 19 December 2015 23:58:34 Steve M. Robbins wrote: > > I found the config file (commit-access-control.cfg). Who is able to edit > > this for me? > > I have just added you, just ping me if you still get problems. I see your change to svn+ssh://s...@svn.debian.org/svn/pkg-kde/scripts/svn- hooks/commit-access-control.cfg. However, the change didn't get propagated to the copy in the actual hooks directory on alioth (/svn/pkg-kde/hooks). I suspect this was supposed to be automatic, but it's possible a manual step was required. The permissions on files in the hooks directory are a bit odd; most are owned by root, but some have different owners. I suspect someone may have edited files directly in the past rather than relying on committing to "pkg- kde/scripts". In this specific instance, the file is not writeable by the group, which may be why your update was missed: smr@moszumanska:/svn/pkg-kde/hooks$ ls -l total 100 -rw-r--r--+ 1 pusling-guest scm_pkg-kde 4584 Nov 9 2014 commit-access- control.cfg -rwxrwxr-x+ 1 root scm_pkg-kde 11293 Oct 31 2003 commit-access- control.pl I took the liberty of updating the file manually using the filesystem -- so now it's owned by me :-( . However, I did set the group write bit; so hopefully can be maintained as normal in future. After that change, I was able to update digikam. Thanks for your help! -Steve signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. -- http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-kde-talk
Re: Digikam
Steve, No issues, I just haven't had time t o package. Mark On Friday, 18 December 2015, Steve M. Robbins <st...@sumost.ca> wrote: > On December 15, 2015 02:17:51 PM Lisandro Damián Nicanor Pérez Meyer wrote: > > Hi Steve! I'm writing you because you said you wanted to maintain > digikam. > > Yes. I'd like to update it to the latest stable (4.x) release. > > > > The last active maintainers where Pino Toscano and Mark Purcell. I think > > digikam is currently maintained on svn, if that's still the case and you > > want to switch to git you are free to do so. > > OK, good to know. In the short term, I'm fine with continuing to use svn. > > Pino, Mark: any comments or reservations about version 4.14? > > > Thanks, > -Steve > -- http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-kde-talk
