Should we remove amarok?

[Scarlett Clark]

Is this something I can work on? I will be on vacation next week though, so
it would be a minute.
Cheers,
Scarlett

On Thu, May 17, 2018 at 9:56 AM, Lisandro Damián Nicanor Pérez Meyer <
perezmeyer at gmail.com> wrote:

> On 17 May 2018 at 12:07, Lisandro Damián Nicanor Pérez Meyer
> <perezmeyer at gmail.com> wrote:
> > El jueves, 17 de mayo de 2018 11:59:12 -03 Lisandro Damián Nicanor Pérez
> Meyer
> > escribió:
> >> Hi! Amarok is currently unbuildable on unstable because of a missing
> >> dependency (#877295) and soon it will be a double issue trough #896941.
> >>
> >> I know that there is an upstream effort to provide a Qt5-based amarok,
> but
> >> does that means we should keep it unbuildable in unstable?
> >>
> >> I would simply prefer to remove it, but maybe I am missing something
> here.
> >> So, if you have any thoughts on why we should not remove it, please do
> say
> >> so.
>
> I have just communicated with Pino. He told me that he is interested
> in keeping amarok
> in shape but due different reasons he was not able to do it yet. I
> proposed him to handle
> it myself if I get to it first.
>
> Both bugs seems to be solvable by removing deps +/- touching some
> files if needed.
>
> --
> Lisandro Damián Nicanor Pérez Meyer
> http://perezmeyer.com.ar/
> http://perezmeyer.blogspot.com/
>
> --
> https://alioth-lists.debian.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-kde-talk
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://alioth-lists.debian.net/pipermail/pkg-kde-talk/attachments/20180517/cd86c5c5/attachment.html>