On Fri, 20 May 2016 08:04:07 +1000, Ozi Traveller wrote:
> +1
>
> As a jwm user I would really like to see it brought up to date.

Please excuse me for nitpicking here once again:

The De[bi|vu]an jwm package *is* up to date. The only thing
that'd need to be changed (dropped in this case) is a patch
that makes some trivial cosmetic changes to the example.jwmrc
file. And that'd only serve to relieve the end-user of the
burden of applying some miniscule edits to his jwmrc
configuration file.

I suspect it would have taken me less time to do just that,
than it took me to type this message — if only I had the
skills necessary to maintain a deb package. (Maybe I just
have to dive into the domain of packaging. After all, the
Devuan project's bus factor is still alarmingly low!)

Also note, that a fork would most likely not affect Devuan
Jessie, since (approaching beta2) it is far too late to
introduce non-bugfix changes, I assume.

Best regards
Urban


> On Fri, May 20, 2016 at 2:03 AM, Irrwahn <irrwahn@??? <mailto:irrwahn@freenet.de>> wrote:
>

>     On Thu, 19 May 2016 17:48:33 +0200, Irrwahn Grausewitz wrote:
>     <snip>
>     > Looking at the source package I cannot see a single
>     > invasive patch WRT to the original source.
>     <snip>

>

>     Correction: I missed a patch when skimming over the
>     package contents. I can see now what you meant by
>     "Debianisms". Sorry for the confusion!

>

>     A Devuan fork of jwm would make sense then, and it'd
>     be a trivial one at that.

>

>     Regards
>     Urban
>     _______________________________________________
>     Dng mailing list
>     Dng@??? <mailto:Dng@lists.dyne.org>
>     https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng

>
>