On Fri, May 22, 2015 at 06:25:21PM -0500, Ranjan Maitra wrote: > What I do not quite understand is what is going on on that bug list. > It appears to me that there is an active effort there in the form of > a src.rpm and a spec file. Should I just add mine there in addition > to this effort? A lot of these things come from volunteers -- in fact, even when it's people paid to work on Fedora for one reason or another, some of these packages are just because we think they're a good idea or fun or whatever, not the thing we're paid for, so that's volunteer effort. Which is a long way of saying, sometimes things just get stalled. Sometimes just "hey, I'm still interested!" can help. Failing that, offering to help yourself. :) > Btw, it appears that pypdf is not maintained so PyPDF2 which > incorporates pypdf and also fixes the bugs besides being actively > maintained should be what we should replace with. In other words, > pypdf should be replaced. (And I have verified that it works for both > python3 as well as python2.) Yeah, looks like it'l have to be made for both in order to accommodate pdf-stapler, until pdf-stapler is updated to 3. -- Matthew Miller <mattdm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Fedora Project Leader -- users mailing list users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
