On Thursday 18 March 2004 19:37, Michael Schwendt wrote:
Hi Mihai and Rex!
On Thu, 18 Mar 2004 12:45:12 +0200, Mihai Maties wrote:
> I would be interested in taking over the K3b package. I believe that you
> are already familiar with some of the work I did regarding packaging for
> the original K3b developer/maintainer. I would just need to get to know
> the fedora.us policies a little better...
On Thu, 18 Mar 2004 06:48:20 -0600 (CST), Rex Dieter wrote:
> I volunteer to maintain the k3b package. I'm already maintaining the
> package for the kde-redhat project. Throwing it at the fedora.us queue
> won't be too much more work.
That it can be more difficult to package for fedora.us, e.g. due to
missing mp3 support and building for multiple platforms from a single
src.rpm or trying to make it co-exist with "Arson", is another
matter. I've solved the mp3 and KDE 3.1/3.2 issues with conditional code,
so e.g. building an mp3 plugin package for
rpm.livna.org is trivial,
albeit makes the spec file more ugly. The alternative would be to build
for "livna" only.
I think that this paragraph reffers to me mostly since Rex is using exactly
your src.rpm to build the packages. I am aware of the policies involved and
my intention was to continue packaging K3b for fedora.us based on your spec
file not mine. I have not decided yet if I'll drop my K3b repository or
continue the work to provide "bleeding-edge" K3b experience for those who
want it, but one thing is certain: the fedora.us packages and xcyb packages
will be more compatible in the future... :)
Justin M. Forbes has mentioned that k3b might be included with fc2,
maybe
in test3, with the i18n files merged. If that happened, fedora.us k3b
maintainance would be reduced to fc1 and rh9.
Great news.
Mihai