Re: [PATCH] debian: package ruby bindings

diff --git a/0b/15d62d8b4a08f135b48aa68ecf7f2a9186b204 b/0b/15d62d8b4a08f135b48aa68ecf7f2a9186b204
new file mode 100644 (file)
index 0000000..6155ad7
--- /dev/null
+++ b/0b/15d62d8b4a08f135b48aa68ecf7f2a9186b204
@@ -0,0 +1,102 @@
+Return-Path: <cworth@debian.org>\r
+X-Original-To: notmuch@notmuchmail.org\r
+Delivered-To: notmuch@notmuchmail.org\r
+Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])\r
+       by olra.theworths.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0D96F431FAF\r
+       for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>; Mon, 29 Apr 2013 11:17:14 -0700 (PDT)\r
+X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at olra.theworths.org\r
+X-Spam-Flag: NO\r
+X-Spam-Score: 0.01\r
+X-Spam-Level: \r
+X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.01 tagged_above=-999 required=5\r
+       tests=[T_MIME_NO_TEXT=0.01] autolearn=disabled\r
+Received: from olra.theworths.org ([127.0.0.1])\r
+       by localhost (olra.theworths.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)\r
+       with ESMTP id CLReelzY2XTk for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>;\r
+       Mon, 29 Apr 2013 11:17:07 -0700 (PDT)\r
+Received: from arlo.cworth.org (arlo.cworth.org [50.126.95.6])\r
+       (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))\r
+       (No client certificate requested)\r
+       by olra.theworths.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CB166431FAE\r
+       for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>; Mon, 29 Apr 2013 11:17:07 -0700 (PDT)\r
+Received: from yoom.home.cworth.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])\r
+       by arlo.cworth.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0474A6DE00B2;\r
+       Mon, 29 Apr 2013 11:17:06 -0700 (PDT)\r
+Received: by yoom.home.cworth.org (Postfix, from userid 1000)\r
+       id DAE6DC43A90; Mon, 29 Apr 2013 11:17:05 -0700 (PDT)\r
+From: Carl Worth <cworth@debian.org>\r
+To: Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@gmail.com>,\r
+       David Bremner <bremner@debian.org>\r
+Subject: Re: [PATCH] debian: package ruby bindings\r
+In-Reply-To:\r
+ <CAMP44s1DeLT76kTro85cm-vCAkiMUuYdcjFM3xQiUFtvXSVk_Q@mail.gmail.com>\r
+References: <1365031678-25188-1-git-send-email-felipe.contreras@gmail.com>\r
+       <87y5clte1j.fsf@zancas.localnet>\r
+       <CAMP44s07KeL4uAChs3KFiqwcsCwWTvni6MzFGzXNeO7=sd6U6Q@mail.gmail.com>\r
+       <87wqs4rsjm.fsf@zancas.localnet>\r
+       <CAMP44s2RuAGjJV089swpjwG9i5X=sARPYve6XZPyK7X7QwZBDg@mail.gmail.com>\r
+       <878v48om5u.fsf@zancas.localnet>\r
+       <CAMP44s3x0m-KUN6aND71SHbBWz6S_23ZcQ-mcT+qxVtEdU+-5w@mail.gmail.com>\r
+       <87a9oiw2pc.fsf@zancas.localnet>\r
+       <CAMP44s3Qyc4mNx=MotX5vUKo-xpj0fj9Qmcoidpe3AKjbjV9_Q@mail.gmail.com>\r
+       <871u9twrj2.fsf@zancas.localnet>\r
+       <CAMP44s1DeLT76kTro85cm-vCAkiMUuYdcjFM3xQiUFtvXSVk_Q@mail.gmail.com>\r
+User-Agent: Notmuch/0.13.2 (http://notmuchmail.org) Emacs/23.4.1\r
+       (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu)\r
+Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2013 11:16:58 -0700\r
+Message-ID: <87fvy9kxr9.fsf@yoom.home.cworth.org>\r
+MIME-Version: 1.0\r
+Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-=";\r
+       micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"\r
+X-Mailman-Approved-At: Mon, 29 Apr 2013 11:49:17 -0700\r
+Cc: notmuch@notmuchmail.org\r
+X-BeenThere: notmuch@notmuchmail.org\r
+X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13\r
+Precedence: list\r
+List-Id: "Use and development of the notmuch mail system."\r
+       <notmuch.notmuchmail.org>\r
+List-Unsubscribe: <http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/options/notmuch>,\r
+       <mailto:notmuch-request@notmuchmail.org?subject=unsubscribe>\r
+List-Archive: <http://notmuchmail.org/pipermail/notmuch>\r
+List-Post: <mailto:notmuch@notmuchmail.org>\r
+List-Help: <mailto:notmuch-request@notmuchmail.org?subject=help>\r
+List-Subscribe: <http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch>,\r
+       <mailto:notmuch-request@notmuchmail.org?subject=subscribe>\r
+X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2013 18:17:14 -0000\r
+\r
+--=-=-=\r
+\r
+Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@gmail.com> writes:\r
+>> My hypothetical laziness is not the reason. It was at the strong\r
+>> insistence of Carl that things are organized this way.\r
+>\r
+> I still don't see why we need to do that. The notmuch project\r
+> shouldn't be bound to the debian project.\r
+\r
+I'm not sure what your specific question is here.\r
+\r
+My strong insistence was that the Debian packaging stuff, (like\r
+debian/rules), be hosted in the main notmuch repository.\r
+\r
+If that were separated to a separate repository (or a separate branch),\r
+then nothing in the current situation would change. Your proposed\r
+change, (which is to debian/rules if I read it correctly), would instead\r
+be directed at that separate repository/branch.\r
+\r
+And either way, David's currently the person to decide what lands there.\r
+\r
+Is there anything I'm missing here?\r
+\r
+-Carl\r
+\r
+--=-=-=\r
+Content-Type: application/pgp-signature\r
+\r
+-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----\r
+Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux)\r
+\r
+iEYEARECAAYFAlF+uRoACgkQ6JDdNq8qSWhSEgCgoHzNfy4kkKzWAyfgCmGHcCb/\r
+CjkAoIAl1e0qs9fbe8UzfVYVGRS0Hpwi\r
+=mNcf\r
+-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----\r
+--=-=-=--\r