-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Sun, Oct 14, 2007 at 07:59:54PM +0100, tim hall wrote: > Joost Yervante Damad wrote: > >On Sunday 14 October 2007 11:32:28 tim hall wrote: > > > >>I wrote: > >> > >>>I think it would be a better idea to put out an RFP on ingen > >>> > >>Judging by the complete lack of bug reports against om, I'm guessing the > >>package fails to run on anyone's system. > >> > > > >AFAIK it runs fine on 32bit intel machines. > > > > > >>I think om should be Orphaned, > >>I know that might seem slightly odd, considering that it is a > >>co-maintained package already, but this action may result in the most > >>appropriate outcome. > >> > > > >Which is ? (Which outcome?) > > > Am I being a bit obtuse? Sorry I'll try to clarify: > > I am assuming from previous conversations that you want to stop > maintaining om. > I am also assuming that Free would appreciate a co-maintainer if > om/ingen continues to be maintained by debian-multimedia or that it > would be worthwhile to find a DD who wants to take sole responsibility. > > If om runs fine on 32bit intel machines (apart from mine) then it is > still potentially useful in its present form, however it will present > problems in future if it FTBFS on other architectures or generates any > RC bugs. > > I am suggesting RFPing ingen and Orphaning om so as to put the kind of > entries in the WNPP list that might attract an interested DD. That is > the outcome I'd like I guess. I'm hoping it would be apparent that in > fact it is ingen that needs the work, with om being replaced with a > dummy package for upgrade purposes. It may be that there is a more > straightforward way of doing this. > > The one major reservation to all this is that I'm guessing, due to om's > low popcon rating and lack of bug-reports, that I'm the only person who > actually cares about this application and that only because it might be > useful in theory. In which case I might as well build ingen from source > and forget about it. > > I'm persevering with this thread because I suspect om/ingen may be worth > the effort. It does appear to have 30 actual users. I suspect that > several people have installed and forgotten about it because of the lack > of menu entry. I also suspect that most users may not be aware that an > om package exists for Debian. The lack of response from anyone else is > starting to confirm those suspicions. > > I'd also be very grateful if anyone wants to challenge my assumptions, > suggestions and suspicions on this matter. :) Apologies if this is > gratuitously verbose. > > I'm a) not a DD and b) not a programmer otherwise I'd simply package it > myself. I'm probably capable of learning how to do it, but I'm not sure > it would be best use of my skills. I could go on ... ;) >
Umm, you might want to ask the developer of Ingen if he even *wants* users. I don't think he's even made a release of it yet. It seems to be just a rather impressive personal hacking project right now, rather than anything that's actively seeking a user base or providing support for one. - -ken -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFHEqree8HF+6xeOIcRAs67AJ4tRytmyIPTXj1/DdQ5XFPBfA+mFACbB/gc UnioauViJhdvMCyJJKP7+ZI= =Vd57 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
