On Mon, 2009-12-21 at 06:32 +0100, Daniel A. Nagy wrote: > Hello, Hi Daniel,
> Well, only the three packages together, including their OpenWrt Makefiles (but > excluding the sources of qrencode library). I haven't made any attempts at > making the software portable beyond OpenWrt; right now it is very > OpenWrt-specific and I don't see that changing. Ahhhh. I see. That's quite a different story than most packages then. > That is an interesting question and honestly, I have never considered it, > since > our software does not make much sense outside of the context of OpenWrt. Yes. I see. I was not aware of this. So given that you maintain your software in the context of OpenWRT, perhaps a full source inclusion is the better way to go. > As I have mentioned, our software is very OpenWrt-specific. We, as a company, > are perfectly willing to maintain it within the framework of OpenWrt with > either > myself or the developer (his name is Rooslan Khayrov), who actually wrote most > of the code, acting as the package maintainer. Fair enough then. > Of course, the above does not hold for the Code128 barcode stuff, which I am > perfectly prepared to rip out into a separate source tarball. But what would > you > recommend with the rest that is entirely dependent on OpenWrt? I'd probably be fine with it remaining in full source, but I am not a maintainer here, so somebody who is will have to step up and make that decision. > Thanks in advance for your suggestions! NP. b.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ openwrt-devel mailing list openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
