Re: motion - please do a sponsored upload for me (new revision with debconf fix)
On Sat, Aug 14, 2004 at 09:18:12AM +0200, Frederik Dannemare wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> On Saturday 14 August 2004 03:16, Wesley J Landaker wrote:
> > On Friday 13 August 2004 19:06, Adam Majer wrote:
> > > Frederik Dannemare wrote:
> > > > Hi,
> > > >
> > > > I was hoping that my previous sponsor of motion would have the
> > > > time this week to do a new upload which has a couple of very
> > > > small fixes, but unfortunately I haven't heard from him yet, so
> > > > I'm really, really
> > >
> > > I'll look at it and upload within an hour or so (unless there are
> > > problems).
> > I saw a copy of Frederik's same e-mail in debian-mentors earlier
> > today and already checked it over and uploaded. My only concern was
> > that it's not quite up-to-date with the latest upstream (3.1.14 vs
> > 3.1.16), but since it's a bugfix, I went ahead and sponsored.
> When I adopted the package, I chose to update from 3.0.6 to 3.1.14, and
> not 3.1.15/3.1.16, because I personally feel 3.1.14 is the most stable
> of them. .15 had a lot of problems, and although .16 fixed much of
> this, I still feel 3.1.14 is the better choice for the sarge release.
> Many thanks for the upload, Wesley. I really appreciate it. And thank
> you, Adam, for once again offering to help me with an upload.
BTW, what is the deal with motion and 2.6 kernels ? I am under the
understanding that it requires the videoloop or whatever module, which is not
only abandoned upstream, but also not yet ported to 2.6 kernels.