On 07 Feb 2017 19:21, Geert Stappers wrote: > On Tue, Feb 07, 2017 at 09:10:17AM +0100, Kolja Waschk wrote: > > The development could move to primarily use git on SF as well, IMHO > > there's no need to change the provider, and why change the name? > > > > Anyway, if you all decide to move to github, appropriate redirecting > > information can be put on the SF site. > > It doesn't matter where an abandoned project is hosted. > > > > > What is needed to get it included? > > > > Main problem at the moment however is that there is no really actively > > caring maintainer at the SF project. I doubt that changes if you add > > moving to another server on the to-do list. > > > > I feel somewhat responsible, but even after reading the mails in the > > past weeks I haven't found time to actively help yet. Sorry for that. > > > > What is currently highest priority on the to-do list for UrJTAG? > > Showing the world that this project is not completely abandoned. > > That be easy done by applying the patch in the start of this thread.
that assumes this script is appropriate for upstream in the first place. i don't think it makes sense for distro-specific packaging logic to live in the repo, especially when it's just a thin wrapper on top of `git archive`. -mike
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________ UrJTAG-development mailing list UrJTAG-development@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/urjtag-development
