Eric Dantan Rzewnicki wrote:
On Wed, Mar 11, 2009 at 02:08:57PM +0100, Cassiel wrote:
2009/3/11 Daniel James <dan...@64studio.com>
Hi Raffaele,
I can't go in deep about debian packages accept/reject workflow and
policy stuff but non-free repository should allow some compromise in
these direction...
It wasn't about free versus non-free (for once), it was that Ardour
developers were forced to embedded their own forked versions of
libraries, because upstream authors had not applied patches that Ardour
needed to function properly.
Some Debian developers decided this was unacceptable, as a matter of
policy - result: no Ardour in Lenny. I don't think that's a win for
Debian.
Cheers!
Daniel
So, sid/unstable version of Ardour will be there forever and ever and
never be released nor meet testing because of debian developer "laziness"
in patching...
...can someone borrow me a flame-thrower tank?
It's not a matter of debian developer laziness ... the ardour in sid
needs patches to _upstream_ libraries. If/when those upstream libraries
accept the patches the ardour devs need, then those libraries can get
into debian and ardour can use the debian packaged versions rather than
it's own forked versions.
Not a good thing that such a core application is not in Debian stable /
testing.
Why does other distro's like Ubuntu, Fedora, OpenSuse have it included?
Shouldn't we search for a solution here?
\r
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-multimedia-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
