-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Josselin Mouette wrote: > Le vendredi 10 août 2007 à 04:48 +0200, David Lopez Zajara (Er_Maqui) a > écrit : >> I've read the complete thread, and i understand who the main reason from >> the mantainers are these. But, in the other hand, have the reason of >> gtk1.2 removal porposal. I understand this, but, i say who <SAME> of the >> given reasons are incorrect. > > On what grounds? > > As you don't seem to have understood at all, let me repeat it: XMMS is > unmaintained. GTK+ 1.2 is unmaintained. Anyone who wants to see xmms > remain in Debian should take over maintainership for both, including > upstream maintenance and all that it implies.
First: This thread is a right call for "kill xmms from debian", not a thread for "call for solutions because a possible unmantained upstream". Now, reading from the xmms official webpage, i've readed this: <QUOTE> ATTENTION DEBIAN! Hello José Miguel Parrella Romero. You're a gentoo developer. *hugs and kisses* We haven't deprecated xmms. Why would we? Jul 11, 2007 Thomas Nilsson (thomas at xmms.org) </QUOTE> It isn't a depretiation for this developer, is a form to demostrate who the xmms developers are now active. And, in this thread are now a link for the <2007-07-11> changelog. This are from 1 month later. This is a unmantained upstream package? One motivation for xmms removal are the mantainer unaviability for this. Yeah, but, this have their solution on a orphan request, or request for help. GTK+ 1.2 are unmantained upstream, yes. But, now, in Debian are more than 300 packages who depends on this. Yes, there are many packages they are xmms plugins, but, many of these packages arent packages for xmms. Your right is for remove all these packages from debian? Now, these packages are on unstable, and GTK+ 1.2 too. Some of these packages are mantained now. You are saying to the mantainers who if they doesnt work on a GTK+ 1.2 -> 2.0 port their packages will go out of debian now? If the GTK+ 1.2 upstream is dead from far ago, whats the reason for removal NOW and not one year ago? Or, for wait one year more? If the reason for mantain the GTK+ 1.2 packages its the developed application for this, you can wait a bit more, for upstreams work on them. In the case of xmms, i've a notice for you: - From xmms official webpage (FAQ): <QUOTE> Does XMMS work with GTK+ 2.x? No, XMMS 1.2.x does not work with GTK+ 2, it requires GTK+/GLIB 1.2.x. There is a project called BEEP which is a GTK+2 fork of XMMS. But your existing plugin will have to be ported to GTK+2 for this to work. We will eventually release a GTK+2 version of XMMS 1, but it still hasn't been decided when that will be. Hopefully we'll merge back the good stuff from BEEP to make the transition faster and help to convince plugin authors to port their GTK+1 versions to GTK+2. </QUOTE> I doesn't have more for this, but a comment: I've read on this thread, on a critical for audacious "as xmms replacement", I've pointed who audacious doesn't have many features present on xmms. I've read a reply: "Contact with the main upstream and ask for these features". The same can be for application here: We can suggest to the main upstreams for all these GTK+ 1.2 application for port them to GTK+2. This work it's harder than a simple feature, but its the same, a suggestion. This are applicable for these thread, for all GTK+ 1.2 applications on the archive, and for the "precipitate" reaction on another distributions (mentioned on this thread). Regards. Er_Maqui. - -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] || http://maqui.darkbolt.net Linux registered user number: #363219 PGP key avaliable at KeyServ. KeyID: 0x4233E9F2 - ------------------------------------------------------------------ Los hombres somos esclavos de la historia -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFGvUHJfFjA4EIz6fIRAhLwAJkBfc5CjYfo8XGszh/l11uewHo5KgCfcRax vPYIIVhVL/aaALLX4VuKjBI= =vQpO -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
