On Tue, Nov 29, 2005 at 12:28:50AM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote: > Is there any reason to not simply drop libmusicbrainz-2.0, in favor of the > libmusicbrainz-2.1 package that *everything* else in the archive is using?
Except for the (broken) dcd package, which still Build-Depends on libmusicbrainz2-dev. However, I already tried building this package with libmusicbrainz4-dev and all seemed to run fine, so this probably isn't an issue at all. > There currently seem to not be any python bindings for -2.1, but surely we > should just get updated bindings instead of keeping -2.0 around. (And in > the process, hopefully dropping python2.1/python2.2 in favor of > python2.4...) In fact, this lack of python bindings was the reason for me to favor keeping libmusicbrainz-2.0 for now. On the other hand, upstream reintroduced those binding in their latest release (not yet packaged), so it looks like libmusicbrainz-2.0 won't be needed anymore at all in short time, and when packaging this new release surely older python version support should be dropped in favor of python2.4. Thus, dropping libmusicbrainz-2.0 would only hurt some users and only for short while. Still, right now I intended to stick to a minimal set of changes for an NMU, especially as long as I haven't recieved any feedback from the maintainer regarding the pending adoption... Cheers, Flo
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
