Re: RFH: citadel/webcit
- Date: Tue, 12 Dec 2017 10:21:38 -0500
- From: "Robert J. Clay" <rjclay@xxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: RFH: citadel/webcit
On Mon, Dec 11, 2017 at 7:42 AM, Michael Meskes <meskes@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Anyone interested in citadel/webcit?
I am. (As well as the rest of the citadel packages of course.)
> If not I'm going to have it removed I guess.
I'd be against that.
I have a Jessie installed system that I can't update to Stretch
because citadel won't run on it yet; and the Citadel install there is
one of the primary reasons I'm running that system. (And I prefer to
use Debian for my systems, and 'official' packages when possible.)
I also have a couple of LXC containers (for stretch & buster) I've
used for testing citadel versions, which are waiting pending the
results of the testing I've
seen mention of in the Citadel Development mailing list.
> There used to be a team maintaining these packages,
> but I'm the only one who worked on it in recent years.
I've wondered about that...
I'm a DM (as jame@xxxxxxxxx) not a DD, so there are some things I
can't do directly. I am very interested in helping how I can with
the Citadel packages.
> Not having used the software myself I don't
> really intend to spend more time on it and both packages have an RC bug, that
> upstream may or may not have fixed.
I've been waiting to see how the testing for the new version goes,
that runs on Debian Stretch. If that works out well and the citadel
packages can be updated and it migrates to Testing without issue, I'd
like to at least see it back ported to stretch-backports. (And yes,
I'd be more than happy to keep an eye on any such package in
Robert J. Clay