[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Considerations for 'xmms' removal from Debian

Hash: SHA1

Daniel Kobras wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 04, 2007 at 01:40:05AM -0400, Jordi Gutierrez Hermoso wrote:
>> On 03/07/07, Klaus Ethgen <Klaus@ethgen.de> wrote:
>>> I heard this crap only when using alsa.
>> which is a problem, since OSS is deprecated in favour of ALSA.
> It's only OSS-the-kernel-drivers that are deprecated.
> OSS-the-programming-interface still works fine. Not sure, which part of
> ALSA actually gave rise to Klaus's problems, though.
> Regards,
> Daniel.

We can't give all the problem of the OS to xmms, because in this case,
the fail is from alsa system, makes and convenient bug-report to alsa
and try to solvent them. But, it isn't from xmms.

The "old-good" xmms, with our fails. Yes, it's possible if you are
playing files over nfs we can lock them, and the interface its gtk1 and
its outdated. But, its a consolidated program, very tested and debbuged,
and works fine. We are a kind of "noobs" on debian using xmms, and a
group of older users who uses xmms from long time ago. it's the same as
winamp on windows, there have their users and this is fine.

Personally i'm an xmms user, and now, with this, i have tested other
options. Audacious isn't an option at all. Yes, we have the same
winamp-style, and can read winamp & xmms skins, too. But, it's newer and
doesn't have some options interesting (For example, add directory to
playlist). It isn't a joke, this is a <neccesary> option. Opening the
songs one-by-one or dir-by-dir without recursivety of the inside
directories isn't an option at all.

xmms2... Well, when we have a decent client, then can are an option.
Now, isn't it.

I think who xmms removal its maked in another distros, and i understand
who gtk1 its too outdated. But, debian its the system-for-all and if a
user really likes and older application, we can have this.

* The BTS reports 231 bugs, most tagged 'important' or 'normal', and a
couple of debugging was attempted with little success.
* XMMS is broken in several aspects, one of the most important being
it's dependence on GTK+ 1.2 and no UTF-8 support, which is standard in
Debian Etch.
* Other distributions have already discussed XMMS removal. Gentoo
hardmasked the package based on the same rationale [1]
* 'bmpx' and 'audacious' are in Debian, ranks 8048 and 3649 in popcon.
Both are very good and development-active substitutes to xmms.
* There's also in Debian the upstream-supported xmms2 package, 2598 in
popcon rank.

xmms is now 1069 in the overall popcon rank, with 11029 installations,
not counting the plugin users.

If the BTS reports more than 200 bugs, feels free to send to real-xmms
mantainers (the programmers). xmms have an active development line (In
their CVS the last commit was from some weeks ago).

Xmms are broken in "several aspects". Comment out these aspects, the
solution its simply report this aspects, not makes a discursion from
this without planning any solution. If these aspects are know as long
ago, whats the reason for not report this?

Other distros have already removal xmms. Well, other distros aren't
debian. If gentoo gets the facto an hipotetic kernel on 2.7 branch...
(generally, unstable branch of kernel), debian will go to make this too?

bpmx and audacious are 8000+ and 3600+ reported installations, and xmms2
are 2500+ against the 11000+ of xmms. And, i can say who xmms have
already much more. xmms its a oldest package, who many users can have
installed and using them from potato distro or older. In this moment,
popcon isnt present. The popcon information are very unusable in this
case because the package can have a lot of users with this without
popcon. (I have an example on me, with an installation from long ago, i
have popcon because i've installed this manually).


I think who xmms removal now isnt an option at all. We can have their
failures, but, isn't a reason for dropping out of mirrors. Debian have a
lot of packages, some of this unmantained, dead upstream and much more.
And, now, we are here talking of removal from the archive a
active-upstream and mantained package...? Please, consider to removal
these lot-of-stuff who are really buggy and unmantained, with RC bugs
and dead-upstreams.

- --
Note: Please doesnt go offtopic in this thread with "dependencies of
audacious" or another OT stuff. If we feels free to discurss these
themes, open a reply of "dependencies failures on sound-like programs",
or so, but doesn't contamine this thread. This discursion it's important
to be read with some people, and 200+ posts discursion its hard to read.
And, with some OT's in this, we can have more than 200+ posts.

- --
er_maqui@darkbolt.net  ||  http://maqui.darkbolt.net
Linux registered user number: #363219
PGP key avaliable at KeyServ. KeyID: 0x4233E9F2
- ------------------------------------------------------------------
Los hombres somos esclavos de la historia
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)


Reply to: