On Fri, Sep 18, 2009 at 11:00 AM, Ondřej Surý <email address hidden> wrote:
> Pierre, no I am not getting it.
>
> Webpages www.libgd.org seems to be dead, so if you call it fork or
> proper package, it doesn't really matter, if the library has a upstream
> maintainer. If you took over maintainership of libgd, maybe it's time to
> write some roadmap, or at least something into news.
It is not dead, watch the commits. We are focusing on 2.1 release.
> Anyway I would happily add your compatibility patch to 5.2.11, if you
> can prepare isolated patch.
I won't have the time to do it. It is in 5.3, if only 5.3 had made it
to the last release. However it could be a definitive *huge* plus for
your users to finally have something usable for gd and php.
hi,
On Fri, Sep 18, 2009 at 11:00 AM, Ondřej Surý <email address hidden> wrote:
> Pierre, no I am not getting it.
>
> Webpages www.libgd.org seems to be dead, so if you call it fork or
> proper package, it doesn't really matter, if the library has a upstream
> maintainer. If you took over maintainership of libgd, maybe it's time to
> write some roadmap, or at least something into news.
It is not dead, watch the commits. We are focusing on 2.1 release.
> Anyway I would happily add your compatibility patch to 5.2.11, if you
> can prepare isolated patch.
I won't have the time to do it. It is in 5.3, if only 5.3 had made it
to the last release. However it could be a definitive *huge* plus for
your users to finally have something usable for gd and php.
Cheers,
--
Pierre
http:// blog.thepimp. net | http:// www.libgd. org