Re: orphaning cdparanoia
> Is cdparanoia in debian different from upstream?
Currently it is not. I've made changes in the past and pushed them
upstream, and the author (Christopher Montgomery is his name, aka Monty)
has generally accepted the patches. (Sometimes with mods.) For instance,
libcdparanoia never existed prior to a Debian bug report requesting it. I
updated the build to split out the library, and Monty accepted those
Currently what we have is very very close to upstream. Check out the
source package/diff for the details of what's different. 99% is simply the
debian specific build stuff.
> Do you want the new maintainer to patch upstream, or do you want him to
> develop upstream with the upstream author?
My opinion is that a new maintainer should send the patches upstream. But
Monty has been running in overload mode for some time, as he's also the
lead on the ogg vorbis project and he and a few others seem to be
successfully running a business on that codebase.
So it's possible that the Debian cdparanoia could diverge from the upstream
codebase if he's too busy to integrate the patches, or doesn't like them
and doesn't have time to make them more to his liking It's also possible
that if the new maintainer fed good patches upstream, they'd be accepted
upstream. It depends on a variety of factors. Lately he's been
unresponsive due to "real life", I think.
Having said all of that, there are feature requests in the BTS that require
code changes and I suspect that simply passing those upstream isn't going
to make those features appear.
Does that clear things up at all?
Dale E. Martin, Clifton Labs, Inc.
Senior Computer Engineer
pgp key available