On 12/11/18 8:45 PM, Alad Wenter via aur-general wrote:
On 12/11/18 8:30 PM, Alad Wenter wrote:
Since the discussion period is about to end without much discussion...
Right now the rate of new applications is very high - about 2 new applications per month. That makes a thorough review difficult.
Considering the positive experiences of the sponsor, it would be a shame to let a voting period pass. That said, I'm not sure we have sufficient information - at present - to proceed with such a voting period in a meaningful manner.
I agree
So about Foxboron's question for confirmation: "Say one or two people confirm they think the voting process should be continued after the discussion has ended?" - I don't know.
Let's try to get the ball rolling by asking some questions. .. snip .. 3. I have no idea on what some of your more complicated packages do, or why they would require said complexity, e.g. iup. [2] Perhaps you could explain a bit on that regard.
Taking a closer look at iup, what's with the `sed`ding in prepare()? - those should be patches, as sed will silently fail when they stop applying - why do you explicitly link iupview statically? Also, the url is reachable via https - you should maybe update that. -- Rob (coderobe) O< ascii ribbon campaign - stop html mail - www.asciiribbon.org