On 09/14/2016 08:37 AM, Stefan Schmidt wrote: > Hello. > > On 14/09/16 00:13, Ross Vandegrift wrote: >> On 09/13/2016 05:58 PM, Stefan Schmidt wrote: >>> I guess you would need to ask the Debian packagers to update or find new >>> ones wanting to keep up with the work. To me the maintainers seem to be >>> missing in action and so far everybody stepped up to replace them. Part >>> of the problem is that interested folks might not be a Debian >>> maintainers and would need a sponsor. I tried to arrange for this with a >>> Debian Developer I knew but even for the sponsor its a lot work so it >>> did not pan out. >> >> The current Debian maintainer has been missing, but supposedly returning >> soon. > > Soon as in this year? > > In the meantime, I've been maintaining updated Debian packaging >> in the debian/sid branch of: >> https://github.com/rvandegrift/efl >> https://github.com/rvandegrift/e >> >> Soon, I hope we'll be able to get these into the archive. > > I have seen you mention this before and I wonder how realistic this hope > is. Are you a Debian Developer or maintainer? Do you have a sponsor that > would sponsor your non packager uploads? > > This all sounds hard, but over the last 3 years I have seen various > approaches to make the situation better. None of it succeeded. > >>> If you compare this to other mainstream distros like OpenSUSE or Fedora >>> which ship really up to date packages I can't really see why our code is >>> not interesting for debian while it is for other distros. But given how >>> long we have this situation I think we might have to face it that this >>> will not change. >> >> Hypothesis: E17 on EFL 1.8 might be old, but it's reasonably stable and >> useful. So end-users that do not follow EFL development might not >> know/care about new features. Those that do probably build from source. > > You think these users do also not care about bug fixes and security > fixes? You know many people that are using efl 1.8 and e17 and are happy > that Debian does not update to newer versions? > > I find it hard to believe that keeping this versions comes from > something else but missing interest or motivation to update the > packages. I talk about Debian unstable here and not some years old > release. (I have been using Debian SID myself for over 10 years and at > that point packages have been updated when new versions came out) > > regards > Stefan Schmidt
The main problem is that if there's know one within debian doing the work then the work doesn't get done, and were we to raise a major security issue and know one is available to do the work or if the package stops building and know one fixes it, its likely the packages will just get dropped. The other thing is that debian has lots of process and picking up debian packaging isn't simple and easy as has been alluded to I think the only really decent solution is hunting down a couple of debian devs and convincing them that they really want to use enlightenment all the time once thats done they can do a little of the work and sponsor / help people like Ross to do the majority of it. Unfortunately this is the downside to debians development model (the upside being that what gets packaged is done to a really high standard). Its great that people like Ross are trying to push this forward so keep up the good work and if there's anything someone also outside of debian can help with or you have questions regarding configure flags etc let us know and we will be happy to help. Cheers -- Simon Lees (Simotek) http://simotek.net Emergency Update Team keybase.io/simotek SUSE Linux Adeliade Australia, UTC+9:30 GPG Fingerprint: 5B87 DB9D 88DC F606 E489 CEC5 0922 C246 02F0 014B
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________ enlightenment-devel mailing list enlightenment-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel
