On Sun, May 22, 2005 at 02:36:50PM +0200, Jeroen van Wolffelaar wrote: > On Sun, May 22, 2005 at 12:41:11AM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote: > > - rename the unrar-nonfree package back to unrar > > - rename the free unnrar package to unrar-free (it can even be left out > > of sarge (version 0.0.1 that is the one year old latest upstream > > version...)) > > - get the non-free package that is again named unrar back into sarge > I've done the first point, neglecting the second point for now, and the > third point is an RM decision. > My rationale to do this, is: > - woody shipped with a non-free unrar named 'unrar', and it worked > - the free version is not functionally equivalent yet, of the .rar files > in the wild, I couldn't actually find a single one that was > unpackeable with the free unrar. > - So, it's too late now to have sarge ship with a free alternative, > because development of that one simply hasn't reached a functionally > (nearly-?) equivalent version. For etch, let's see, but for sarge, > let's just maintain the situation as it was in woody: a non-free > 'unrar' for people not objecting to non-free who want to unrar files. > Once the free unrar matured enough, it can probably ultimately replace > unrar (again), but until that time, I really do believe the free unrar > should be named differently until that point is reached. I offer my > assistance to get this happening again because of what I've done to > unstable at the moment. > RMs, please review unrar-nonfree 1:3.5.2-0.1, restoring a new version of > the unrar that was in woody to sarge. Approved. I had rather hoped to see some feedback from the current unrar-nonfree maintainer about this package name change, though. Chris, is this NMUed change ok with you? -- Steve Langasek postmodern programmer
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature