Hi
On Friday 13 January 2012, Mike Gabriel wrote:
> Hi Reinhard, dear all,
>
> On Fr 13 Jan 2012 11:31:00 CET Reinhard Tartler wrote:
>
> > http://anonscm.debian.org/gitweb/?p=collab-maint/x2go/nx-libs.git;a=tree
> > and, from what I see, is appropriate for being uploaded to unstable. For
> > clarity, I think we should rename the git repository from nx-libs.git to
> > nx-libs-light.git. Mike, can you please handle that?
>
> Renamed!
> http://anonscm.debian.org/gitweb/?p=collab-maint/x2go/nx-libs-lite.git;a=tree
[...]
Thanks, this makes it a lot more reviewable (I stumbled into the full
nx-libs in the master branch last night). nxcomp and nxproxy indeed
don't pose the problems I mentioned last night.
But I wonder, why do you need a merged source for this? The current
versions of nxcomp and nxproxy, each built from their own upstream
tarballs, is already at the 3.2 version state and should work (given
that it's in the archive already) for client uses. If it's stability,
as mentioned in some other string of this thread, that would be a
mere - fixable - bug, but the only reason I can see is making the
server parts buildable - and that's where my concerns of massive code
duplication of the full X.org 6.9 source tree return.
Yes, I'm aware of how well the NX protocol works over high latency and
low bandwidth links, but I also know how much of a nightmare it is to
work on that imake hell of the forked X.org 6.9, aka nx-x11, source.
Regards
Stefan Lippers-Hollmann
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-wnpp-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201201131714.11684.s....@gmx.de
