On Mon, Jan 09, 2017 at 04:39:44PM +0100, Carlos Alberto Lopez Perez wrote:
> I strongly oppose to do (a). Also, it is false that Debian doesn't
> take our updates. They take our updates in the backports repository
> for stable.
The main reason why that happens is that the WebKitGTK+ stable
> On Jan 9, 2017, at 7:39 AM, Carlos Alberto Lopez Perez
> wrote:
>
> On 09/01/17 01:09, Michael Catanzaro wrote:
>> On Sun, 2017-01-08 at 18:59 +0100, z...@falconsigh.net wrote:
>>> For the record, GCC 5 has complete C++14 support. The current
>>> requirement is 4.9, so the
09.01.2017, 20:53, "Michael Catanzaro" :
> On Mon, 2017-01-09 at 16:56 +0100, Carlos Alberto Lopez Perez wrote:
>> Can you please explain how you reach that conclusion?
>> Do you have any data to back up such claim?
>
> No, I don't have data, but it seems extremely naive
On Mon, 2017-01-09 at 16:56 +0100, Carlos Alberto Lopez Perez wrote:
> Can you please explain how you reach that conclusion?
> Do you have any data to back up such claim?
No, I don't have data, but it seems extremely naive to assume that any
significant subset of users use backports. It is not
On 09/01/17 16:47, Michael Catanzaro wrote:
> On Mon, 2017-01-09 at 16:39 +0100, Carlos Alberto Lopez Perez wrote:
>> I strongly oppose to do (a). Also, it is false that Debian doesn't
>> take
>> our updates. They take our updates in the backports repository for
>> stable.
>
> Nobody uses that.
On Mon, 2017-01-09 at 16:39 +0100, Carlos Alberto Lopez Perez wrote:
> I strongly oppose to do (a). Also, it is false that Debian doesn't
> take
> our updates. They take our updates in the backports repository for
> stable.
Nobody uses that. Users expect to receive security updates in the
On Mon, 2017-01-09 at 16:39 +0100, Carlos Alberto Lopez Perez wrote:
> Another idea is: (c) Drop the "one year after the release"
> requirement.
> Which means that we could update to minimum GCC version to 5.3 (the
> one
> in last Ubuntu LTS) when Debian 9 is released (which hopefully is
>
09.01.2017, 18:47, "Michael Catanzaro" :
> On Mon, 2017-01-09 at 16:39 +0100, Carlos Alberto Lopez Perez wrote:
>> I strongly oppose to do (a). Also, it is false that Debian doesn't
>> take
>> our updates. They take our updates in the backports repository for
>>
On 09/01/17 01:09, Michael Catanzaro wrote:
> On Sun, 2017-01-08 at 18:59 +0100, z...@falconsigh.net wrote:
>> For the record, GCC 5 has complete C++14 support. The current
>> requirement is 4.9, so the bump would be minimal.
>> https://gcc.gnu.org/projects/cxx-status.html#cxx14
> We would need to
Thank you for your suggestions!
Based on our discussion, I've uploaded the patch[1] :)
[1]: https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=166678
Regards,
Yusuke Suzuki
On Fri, Jan 6, 2017 at 2:50 PM, Yusuke SUZUKI wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 6, 2017 at 2:43 PM, Maciej Stachowiak
10 matches
Mail list logo