Am 15.12.2017 um 16:51 schrieb Emilio Pozuelo Monfort: > On 15/12/17 15:23, gregor herrmann wrote: >> On Tue, 31 Oct 2017 11:52:19 +0100, Dr. Tobias Quathamer wrote: >> >>> I've just uploaded openshot-qt to Debian, it's sitting in the NEW queue. >>> Once it's accepted, I plan to remove openshot from Debian, so that this >>> bug can be resolved. >> >> openshot-qt is in unstable now. >> >> Are there any plans to help users with the transition from openshot >> to openshot-qt, like the former depending on the latter before its >> removal or a transitional dummy package or something? >> >> Currently users will detect openshot-qt just by chance ... > > Why was this renamed to openshot-qt? Upstream is still called 'openshot', so > I'm > not sure it makes sense to embed the toolkit in the package name... > > Emilio >
Hi, my plan was to convert openshot into an empty transitional package which depends on openshot-qt. The renaming has been done by the previous maintainer, who already did much work but then orphaned the packaging. I have to admit that I did not think too much about the new package name and I'm not sticking to it. However, it made sense to me, because the new program is a complete rewrite of the old codebase, so starting the Debian package from scratch seemed sensible. Do you think that it might be better to reuse the "old" package openshot instead? Most (if not all) of the currently open bugs against openshot would no longer apply and could be closed, but that's of course manageable. I'm open for suggestions ... :-) Regards, Tobias
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
