Re: ITP Delayed [Re: ITP: jazz++ -- a full sized MIDI sequencer]
On Wed, Oct 25, 2000 at 04:01:38AM +0300, Eray Ozkural wrote:
> You don't have to agree with jazz developers. You just
> have to agree with the license. I'm fond of the "release early,
> release often" rather than "wait for developers' inspirational
> epochs". THe more a program's distributed, the more people
> will use it, test it and fix it.
Jazz developers are happy to have jazz in debian. Its WxWindows who is
not happy about having the old library. And I do think the same way
you do about release policy.
The problem is I would not like to be maintaining an old big (and a
bit buggy) library version which has been discarded by its upstream
developers; It would mean:
-Just ignoring bug reports about it, which is not nice;
-Spending time trying to fix them myself, which would be a waste of
time, given that more recent versions would probably work much
better.
> This is volunteer work, people don't work on deadlines.
> So I think it's okay to wrap up an old lib in the
> jazz package if the program's worth it.
The wrapping might be OK, but it would be quite a job to maintain
it. I will rather try to port jazz to a newer version; I think it will
be a much more interesting task than maintaining the old library.
> I did the same with sourcenav because of the same situation
> (it uses an old version of itcl that's been hacked). So
> the situation is:
> * there's a program that'd better get to people
> * the program depends on an old version of a package in debian
> * the version that the program uses is not forward-compatible
Yes, it is much the same with jazz++. There is also an older version
of the library (libwxxt), which is some kind of wx branch, and which
can be used to compile jazz++. The resulting jazz is too unstable,
though.
> There are two things you can do
> * port the code to debian version
> * wrap up the old version with the package
>
> If porting is too difficult, the second option is the way to go.
I will have to try the port. If I find out it is too difficult for me,
I might consider the second option. I will give it a couple of weeks,
or so...
> You don't have to make that library another package. Just do this
>
> the wxwindows go into....
> /usr/lib/jazz++
>
> (include, bin, ... under that)
>
> If the programs use a GNU style build system, it shouldn't be
> hard to get that right. (./configure --prefix=/usr/lib/jazz++
> or something like that for the most part) If you get stuck
> I think you can ask for help here.
They do; It would be quite easy; probably a much easier task than
porting jazz++ to the newer library. But I would be the only
maintainer for that piece of code...
Thanks,
--- Enrique Robledo Arnuncio <erobledo@ieee.org>
<erobledo@die.upm.es>
<era@ieeesb.etsit.upm.es> ---
Reply to: