-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 6/11/2013 11:56 AM, Andrey Rahmatullin wrote: > On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 07:04:30AM -0400, Stephen M. Webb wrote: >>> Normally you would keep the old version's changelog. But even if you don't, >>> there's no need >>> for an ITP in cases like this, or when part of a package starts to be >>> shipped from a >>> different source upstream. It's like opening an ITP for every upstream >>> release. You can >>> still do it but people are going to complain if it starts to happen very >>> often... >> Perhaps what is not clear is that there is no old version. The SDL2 family >> of libraries is >> not a new version of the SDL family of libraries so much as a new set of >> incompatible >> libraries serving the same purpose, from the same people. There is no common >> code base and >> the libraries are one hundred percent parallel-installable. > Ah, then this is a different case and I agree that it deserves an ITP. > <snip>
My only concern here is that while SDL2 is significantly different, there is an SDL team which ideally would be packaging it. Have they been contacted? I am actually a member of that team but admittedly have not been keeping up with it unfortunately. :( Thanks, - -- Barry deFreese Sometimes helper, sometimes hinderer to: Debian Games, QA, GNU/Hurd -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iEYEARECAAYFAlG3TKsACgkQ5ItltUs5T36YDwCffehi4s76Tb4Yz+4DjjVKBJFP FhsAni2AeL+FPinC9D/vIvcuisTagwID =18wk -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/51b74cab.3030...@gmail.com
