Re: wxwidgets 2.8, anyone?
Hello Daniel,
On Thu, 20 Dec 2007, Daniel Baumann wrote:
> there are more and more packages which require wxwidgets >=2.8. Last
> time[0], I hoped somebody would finally take care of it, but nothing
> happened yet.
>
> With the new version of poedit, it's not possible to build anymore with an
> older wxwidgets, hence the package is required for me. Does anyone have a
> plan to upload wxwidgets 2.8 within the next four weeks? If not, I fear I
> have to do it.
I have been (indirectly) contacted by upstream developers of wxWindows who
are also unsatisfied by the lack of action of Ron. It's clear that Ron and
upstream are not in good terms (Ron being a former upstream developer).
In those conditions I wonder if Ron is really a good maintainer for this
package. And from what I saw in the BTS, he deliberatly blocks any work on
wx 2.8 until an hypothetic transition plan. Though I've not seen any
serious work on a "transition plan" from himself.
I'm also unable to judge of the quality of the 2.6 release compared to 2.8
but I've not seen any serious criticism of 2.8 anywhere else. Ron wonders
if Debian shouldn't skip 2.8 to go straight to 3.0, but according to
upstream it's far more realistic to have 2.8 as main version in Lenny.
If all 2.6/2.4 packages are converted to 2.8, then we might have the
possibility to have 3.0 once it's out. In the mean time, it looks like the
best issue is to start working on 2.8 in Lenny and stabilize it if needed.
Apparently, Vadim Zeitlin <vadim@wxwidgets.org> is ready to take care of
the Debian packaging but he would need a sponsor and I'm sure some help
would be useful as well.
Thus Daniel I'd suggest you to go ahead for wxWindows 2.8 with the help of
Vadim. Ron should simply let this package go because from what I see he
creates unnecessary tensions between upstream and Debian, and even between
other DD who need wxWindows 2.8 for their packages.
Cheers,
--
Raphaël Hertzog
Le best-seller français mis à jour pour Debian Etch :
http://www.ouaza.com/livre/admin-debian/
Reply to: