On Sat, 2017-09-02 at 10:34 -0400, Matthew Miller wrote: > On Sat, Sep 02, 2017 at 09:05:02AM -0500, Michael Cronenworth wrote: > > > Would we be keeping these separate for a long time? Alternatives > > > are > > > really pretty ugly and I'd hate to see that introduced just for > > > one > > > release. > > > > After handling all the rebuilds for version 7, it is pretty rare > > for > > an upstream to support version 7 right now. I would strike an > > uneducated guess at 1-2 years for upstreams to come around to > > porting. It would not surprise me if some upstreams stay at version > > 6 unless ImageMagick decides to stop supporting version 6. Not to > > Ugh. How many of these are using the library and how many are > shelling > out? Could we just tack a 6 on the end of all of the older binaries?
I think is more simpler use version 7 just in F28 and we gain some time. I (also) saw that API change is not easy to fix [1] , issue opened in Jul 18, and no one provide a patch ... [1] https://github.com/OpenShot/libopenshot/issues/60 > > mention the dead upstreams where we will have to port ourselves or > > our friends at Canonical and Debian that don't even have version 7 > > (or a recent version 6) in their repos. > > Or port those to GraphicsMagick as suggested elsewhere. > > -- > Matthew Miller > <mat...@fedoraproject.org> > Fedora Project Leader > _______________________________________________ > devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org > To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org -- Sérgio M. B. _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
