Keeping the Debian Xprint sources seperate from the Debian Xorg sources ? / was: Re: PMF license / was: Re: [Xprint] Re: X Strike Force XOrg SVN commit: r19 -inxorg/trunk/debian: . scripts
Felix Schulte wrote:
> > Since the xprint-org package is anyway maintained outside the xfree86
> > tree AND considering that the whole purpose of these new X.org packages
> > is to split the tree as much as possible, I suggest that we can just
> > stop shipping the xprint code from x.org tree, since there is absolutely
> > no point in shipping it twice and maintaing it twice.
> The X.org tree and the xprint-org are now coming from the same CVS
> repository as annouced on the xprint.mozdev.org front page. However I
> assume that both will continue to have different functionality, X.org
> version being the normal version, xprint-org being the development
> version or something like that.
> Fabio: What about making Drew Parsons the maintainer of both versions
> just for the case that you can't handle it? :)
One version may be less confusing. Unless urgend bugfixing happened the
"normal" release cycles between two major Xprint releases was more or
less six months - the same amount of time Xorg is planning for their
major version release cycle.
But I agree... it sounds a nice idea to make Drew Parsons the maintainer
of the Debian Xorg Xprint server package if he wants to do that (and
Fabio and Branden agree with that).
Maintaining the Xprint server as seperate package may or may not be
slightly more difficult as it now supports the GLX extension (=OpenGL)
which added more or less the whole Mesa codebase to the source. Having
more than one person looking at the Mesa code may help a lot and lower
the pain (at the beginning Drew had to work hard to get the Xprint
server working on all platforms Debian supports and doing the same in
two locations (Mesa in the Debian/Xorg tree and Mesa in the
Debian/Xorg-Xprint) is twice the work where it wouldn't be neccesary)
for Drew... :)
> > I am pretty sure that the knowledge that Drew has on this package is far
> > more deep than the one I have (possibly of other XSF maintainers).
> > Meaning that his package is imho better qualified to stay where it is.
> > Also resolving the issue of shipping two conflicting packages that are
> > supposed to provide and do the same thing.
> > Merging/re-building the package again from X.org means extra work needs
> > to be done/redone/reviewed/etc.
> > If nobody disagree with me i will start removing it within the next 2 or
> > 3 days.
> I disagree :)
I disagree, too. See my comments above.
P.S.: Please keep the Xprint mailinglist <firstname.lastname@example.org> in the CC:
that other people get the emails, too - not everyone is subscribed to
the debian-x lists...
__ . . __
(o.\ \/ /.o) email@example.com
\__\/\/__/ MPEG specialist, C&&JAVA&&Sun&&Unix programmer
/O /==\ O\ TEL +49 641 7950090
(;O/ \/ \O;)