Re: [PATCH] gnu: Add pybitmessage, [PATCH] gnu: Add python2-pyqt-4, [PATCH] gnu: gnu: messaging: Use license: prefix.

[ng0]

Andreas Enge <address@hidden> writes:

> Hello,
>
> On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 12:03:07PM +0000, ng0 wrote:
>> These 3 patches enable us to have a functional pybitmessage version
>> 0.6.1, released 2 days ago.
>> 
>> Subject: [PATCH 1/3] gnu: Add python2-pyqt-4.
>> * gnu/packages/qt.scm (python2-pyqt-4): New variable.
>
> if at all possible, we should not add packages that depend on Qt-4.
> This one, in particular, would revert my following commit:
>
> commit 3297deedd1fcfd98641b01b477fad182f70cad61
> Author: Andreas Enge <address@hidden>
> Date:   Mon Feb 22 21:33:29 2016 +0100
>
>     gnu: Remove python2-pyqt-4.
>     
>     * gnu/packages/qt.scm (python2-pyqt-4): Delete variable. It depends on Qt 
> 4,
>       which does not receive security updates any more.
>
> I had removed the package since I realised that nothing depended on it.
>
> The goal is to get rid of Qt-4 (and also of the monolithic Qt-5).
>
> Andreas
>

Upstream is aware of this and told me they are working on a port towards
qt5 and also python3. However there is no deadline. It is their
choice. As I recently read there are people using Guix who are
interested in using PyBitmessage.
This package is usable, license fits, I find this block you create a bit
harsh. I can understand it, but does it mean that you are against adding
it at all because of qt4?
-- 
ng0
For non-prism friendly talk find me on http://www.psyced.org