Hi, On Wed, 10 Oct 2012, Jasmine Hassan wrote: > For instance, I'm packaging Compiz 0.8.8, for MATE desktop. This, at > least initially, requires a lot of code substitutions, and quite a few > file/dir renaming. (ex.: gnome -> mate, gconf -> mateconf, metacity -> > marco, etc.) I use a home-brewed migration script to generate actions > for that.
Compiz has not been forked but you have to patch it heavily because Gnome/Gconf/Metacity have been forked? Is that right? In that case, I truly believe that MATE should fork Compiz as well and provide clean upstream sources (even if they are automatically generated by a script that does the renames and all). > huge, unnecessary patch. I might as well modify the upstream tarball > and use that as the orig, which, of course, is not proper. Why not? Were you intending to integrate your work in Debian's official compiz package? (Somehow I doubt that the maintainer would be interested to clutter his packaging to accomodate MATE) Cheers, -- Raphaël Hertzog ◈ Debian Developer Get the Debian Administrator's Handbook: → http://debian-handbook.info/get/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20121010064924.ga24...@x230-buxy.home.ouaza.com
