On Thursday, July 19, 2012 08:00:11, Chris Knadle wrote: > On Thursday, July 19, 2012 05:38:47, Ron wrote:
[…] > > If I'd known that Thorvald was not going to be here to manage this > > transition for Wheezy, I'd have never agreed to shipping libcelt in > > the Squeeze release either, and would have instead kept it in sid > > only. If I'd known that his plan to have all other distros ship > > the 0.7.1 release as a temporary interoperability snapshot would > > fail as dismally as it did (no other distro shipped this version > > except debian derivatives who took it from us), I'd have similarly > > vetoed the idea of shipping this as a public library in the last > > stable release too. > > This was definitely not clear; if it had been I wouldn't have considered > re- enabling it as a potential solution. ... except that Nicos Gollan stated that mumble servers have a base assumption that clients have the CELT 0.7.1 codec available. :-/ Is that correct? […] > > I see that this proposal has already resulted in Chris skating down > > the slippery slope of "let's re-enable it for everything else too". > > And we'll get people with no experience or prior involvement to > > maintain it, and we'll enable multi-arch too, and ... > > In terms of re-enabling CELT, I was simply looking upon this as a matter of > fairness to other maintainers. If it's decided only Mumble requires an > exception to use CELT 0.7.1 (which right now doesn't sound like the right > thing to do), I'm fine with that. I mixed up the last sentence above; I was trying to say that I was fine with only Mumle using CELT 0.7.1 if it requires it, rather than any package that could theoretically use it. -- Chris -- Chris Knadle chris.kna...@coredump.us -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org