5 Mar
2013
5 Mar
'13
3:54 p.m.
On Mon, Mar 4, 2013 at 5:50 PM, Stefan Husmann <stefan-husmann@t-online.de> wrote:
I do not get your point here. Why should transmission-cli-svn be removed? How can a package based on svn be aout of date? Why not just orphan it?
I tried to write a new version of the PKGBUILD, including a rename to transmission-svn-cli which I would have based on transmisision-svn and then saw that the diff to transmission-svn boils down to the removal of 6 lines. 6 removed lines (2 of which are msg calls) do no longer seriously justify the existence of a package imo hence I can no longer care about the so-called effort.