2010/11/3 David Paleino
<dapal@debian.org>
On Tue, 02 Nov 2010 22:47:02 +0100, Marc Haber wrote:
> Has there been any development in wicd in the last months that
> suggests that packaging new wicd stuff is worth it?
Due to time costraints of upstream authors, development somewhat stalled in
the last months.
However, I've recently been accepted in the upstream team, I hope I can give
some help there (starting from merging the patches shipped in the Debian
package). And I know Adam Blackburn was preparing a bugfix release versioned
1.7.1 (I saw a "beta2" tarball of it, so I suppose it's coming out soonish).
Iker, I see many people already reviewed your package. With my
wicd-maintainer-hat on, I ask you to add a "Provides: wicd-client" to your
binary package.
Excuse me, i am not sure if i underestand well, "Provides: wicd-client" where? in debian-mentors description?
Also, if it only depends on Qt libs, it would be better IMVHO if you (or
upstream) named it "wicd-qt", to stay consistent with other clients (wicd-gtk
and wicd-curses). Otherwise, wicd-kde would be fine -- but it's just a matter
of consistency, you can call it whatever you like.
yeah, i also thougth about that. I just give that name because it was the original author's given name. But he is very happie with my intention to package it for debian and i know for sure that he doesn't care how i name it. So wicd-qt would be grate.
But.. are you talking only about the package name or also the binary name?
I'll send an email to him just to be sure, maybe he also wants to change it in upstream if i finally find a sponsor.
Thank you,
David