On 12 September 2010 00:39, Philipp Überbacher <[email protected]> wrote: > Excerpts from Det's message of 2010-09-11 19:36:05 +0200: >> On 9/10/10, Lukáš Jirkovský <[email protected]> wrote: >> > On 10 September 2010 13:09, Evangelos Foutras <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> >> >> Sorry, I'm having a hard time deciding what goes and what stays. >> >> >> >> If another TU wants to jump in and handle this request, please do. >> > >> > Wow, what a mess. >> > >> > For now I would certainly leave the songbird-svn. It has correct name >> > and it seems to be quite good PKGBUILD. >> > >> > I'd prefer if the songbird-auto-nightly was renamed to the >> > songbird-nightly-bin and then removed. >> > >> > I think songbird should be removed, because it's in fact the same as >> > songbird-svn. I don't see any reason to keep it because it seems that >> > they do not release any source tarballs. However it has just too much >> > votes to remove it. >> > >> > Lukas >> > >> >> Jesus, well the nicest thing to do then would be to first replace >> "songbird-nightly" with "songbird-auto-nightly" and _then_ delete: >> "songbird", "songbird-auto-nightly" and "songbird-nightly-bin". >> >> "Songbird" does indeed have a lot of votes, which is just too bad, but >> if "the binary version of Songbird" has to be "songbird-bin", then >> "the SVN version of Songbird" has to also be "songbird-svn"... unless >> that logic would need the developers to release a versioned source >> too... which they don't. >> >> Chrissake, >> Det > > I know little about it, but if I'm not wrong, songbird for linux isn't > developed anymore? So what does it matter? > -- > Philipp > > -- > "Wir stehen selbst enttäuscht und sehn betroffen / Den Vorhang zu > und alle Fragen offen." Bertolt Brecht, Der gute Mensch von Sezuan > >
It seems you're right. It should be replaced by Nightingale (http://getnightingale.com/), Songbird's fork.
