On Tue, Apr 04, 2006 at 11:25:48PM -0500, D. Hageman wrote: > On Tue, 4 Apr 2006, D. Hageman wrote: > > > On Tue, 4 Apr 2006, John Harvey wrote: > >>> > >>> I think this is something you first have to discuss with > >>> upstream and get their go before publishing such modified > >>> code and even packaging it for broader consuming. I'm sure > >>> John, who's the maintainer of the xdriver will listen to any > >>> suggestions you have. > >>> > >>> I'm not saying that the changes are bad. It is just not the > >>> way oss works, unless you want to fork the project. If you > >>> really want to fork then please use another versioning, the > >>> current state will only confuse users. Otherwise please feed > >>> this list with little patches that can be reviewed. Thanks. > > I have posted a new version of the RPMs at > http://people.eecs.ku.edu/~dhageman/rpms/ > > This version should be a compatible with pre-existing X configurations. > The only change is that the driver is called ivtvdev_drv.so to keep it > consistent with all of the other X drivers. > > This rpm was made by taking the ark driver from RedHat and switching the > source code with the ivtv X driver. The autotools was updated to handle > the new file names. This is what is in the new tarball. > > A patch of the changes I applied to the ivtv X driver source code to make > it build in this configuration is in a separate file in the SRPMS. > > I didn't take the time to do this initially as I didn't know if there was > any demand for this type of rpm. Now that I have been receiving mail from > people who are finding it useful, I feel like I should polish them up a > bit. > > This should make it easy to continue to develop and distribute the ivtv X > driver like it is now, but still package RPMs that can be used on > RedHat/Fedora-type systems. > > Again, I have no desire to fork anything. I just found the current state > of ivtv rpms didn't meet my needs
Like what? At the beginning of the thread you didn't even know there were other rpms ... > and felt that I could help other people who felt the same way. So, you don't mind the fact that there are now different sets of rpms that conflict with each-other. Who's going to cater for the issue reports that will follow? How do we know whether someting works in your 0.10.6 version vs the official one? If you want to change something do it the proper way, at the source level first. And make suggestions that the maintainer (John) can review and ask for corrections etc. The way you're doing it now *is* a fork. At the very least add a suffix to the version like 0.10.6hageman. -- Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net
pgpL0xcKx4Qna.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ ivtv-devel mailing list [email protected] http://ivtvdriver.org/mailman/listinfo/ivtv-devel
