Sebastian Harl <sh@tokkee.org> (03/08/2009): > Hi Cyril, Hi Sebastian, > I'm interested in helping out with this package and possibly taken > over maintenance if you eventually decide to give it up > entirely. However, I'm pretty short of time currently, so I do not > expect to find some / much time for this until the end of > September. So, if anybody else is interested as well, by all means, > don't hesitate to beat me to it. Of course, I'm also open for > team-maintaining the package. thanks for volunteering. :) Looks like end of september, so sending the answers about the bits of info you required now. ;) > > - Upstream is very nice, but now ships a bundled debian/ directory in > > its tarball, and will continue to do so. Repacking is/will be needed. > > I assume, you've already talked to upstream about that, right? What's > their reason to do so? Yes, in <20090228171709.GI3298@debian.org> and following[1]. 1. https://mailman.research.att.com/pipermail/graphviz-devel/2009/000932.html > > - There are libraries, with different sonames, and plugins. I guess > > there's very little point in splitting the current libgraphviz4 > > library in more libraries (given it only has 3 rdeps last I checked) > > but you'll need to understand the library packaging issues here, and > > try hard not to break anything. > > Upstreams seems to use two different SONAME versions only - one for all > libraries and one for the plugins. That does not sound right to me on a > first glance. Did you talk to upstream about that? Do you have any > further information? > > If that changes at some time in the future, I'm not sure if it'll still > make sense to ship a single libgraphviz4 package only but until then > that sounds perfectly reasonable to me ;-) Same thread as above. > > - There are bindings for several languages, and some bugs open against > > them. These bindings were requested presumably for Ubuntu, and given > > that some aren't really used, or buggy, it might make sense to drop > > some. Note that obviously, upstream doesn't know how to use each of > > them, given they're swig-generated. > > Did you talk to any Ubuntu guys about that? Not that I really care much > as long as they do not approach me but I would not want to "destroy" > anything either. Nope, only added them on doko's requests. I'm replying to the FTBFS bug in a second. Mraw, KiBi.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature