Hi,
On Sun, Nov 4, 2012 at 4:29 AM, andre999 <[email protected]> wrote: > Jehan Pagès a écrit : > >> Hi, >> >> On Sat, Nov 3, 2012 at 11:11 PM, PhilippeDidier >> <[email protected] >> <mailto:philippedidier@**laposte.net<[email protected]>>> >> wrote: >> >> Jehan Pagès a écrit : >> > Hi, >> > >> > I noticed we propose only the Jack2 package, but no Jack1. Yet >> Jack2 is >> > simply another implementation in C++ of the Jack protocol, and not >> a >> > newer version (as the official website also states clearly: >> > >> http://trac.jackaudio.org/**wiki/Q_differenc_jack1_jack2<http://trac.jackaudio.org/wiki/Q_differenc_jack1_jack2>). >> > >> > Plus I had a very annoying bug with Ardour when using Jack2, and >> people >> > on Ardour mailing list told me it was a known issue with Jack2 >> (both >> > Ardour and Jack2 were installed from the Mageia 2 packages). I >> compiled >> > Jack1, and it indeed fixed the issue. >> > >> > So I am thinking on proposing a spec for Jack1. >> > >> > But then I have questions: >> > >> > 1/ How should I name this package? The jack2 package is named >> "jackit" >> > and I have no idea where you got that from (I guess this is a >> shorter >> > name for "Jack Audio Connection Kit", but should we really change >> > package names this way? >> > It is not that long). The official alternative >> > name of Jack2 is "jackdmp" (see README here: >> > >> https://github.com/jackaudio/**jack2<https://github.com/jackaudio/jack2>). I >> saw nowhere else this >> "jackit" >> > naming. >> > >> We inherit this from Mandrake : in the early years of Mandrake a jack >> package already existed but it had nothing to do with JACK (Jack Audio >> Connexion Kit) : it was a console frontend for cd rippers, still >> provided in Mageia... >> >> When JACK was imported into Mandrake it had to be given an other >> name... >> so jackit !!! >> There was a tonic controversy on Mandrake forum about this in 2003 or >> 2004 year. >> Mandrake and then Mandriva and and then Mageia are the only >> distributions calling JACK package "jackit" .... >> > So I am questioning the naming of this existing package, and >> would like >> > to propose some rename along with a new name for a Jack1 package. >> > Maybe simply "jack1" and "jack2"? Or "jack" and "jackdmp"? >> > >> > 2/ How should the virtual dependency be named? >> > The existing "jackit" spec provides a "jackit-devel" and a >> "libjack-devel". >> > >> > I think that none of the names are really fit IMO. First jackit >> for the >> > same reason as before (I don't see where this name comes from), >> also >> > libjack (and the -devel suffix) because this kit is not *only* a >> library >> > (there are also the jackd daemon, tools, etc.). >> > >> > I propose simply "jack" as virtual package name. >> > >> > How does this sound? >> > Thanks. >> > >> > Jehan >> Not simple because of this context ... >> If you want to call JACK jack you need to remove first the existing >> jack >> from the repo, and to modify the spec for every package requiring >> jackit >> now, to make them require jack if it is the new package name for JACK >> . >> >> Post Scriptum : Reading this I don't know if my explanation is clear >> enough ... >> A key to understand what I wrote : >> "jack" is the name of a package (whatever its content is) >> "jackit" is the name of a package >> "JACK" is the recursive acronym (Jack Audio Connexion Kit) of the >> software you are talking about >> >> >> Ok I understood the deal. >> I would personally prefer even a longer package name like >> jack-audio-connection-kit. Mageia would gain from having clearer naming. >> Especially if we add the Jack1 alternative. >> >> Now if this is a big deal, and it generates a controversy again, it is >> not that a big deal. The question thus is: how do I call Jack1 package >> then? And can I say that this new package "Provides: jackit" so that it >> works as an alternative to Jack2 (for instance for Ardour)? >> Thanks. >> >> Jehan >> > > why not give jack1 the name : > "jack1 - the Jack Audio Connection Kit 1" > and modify the description to include : > "This is the original C implementation of the Jack Audio Connection Kit > protocol (JACK). It is under active development concurrently with jackit > (JACK2)" > > I'll do this like this, then, and propose a SPEC to my mentor, maybe today. It might also be a good idea to modify the jackit description to indicate > that it is concurrent to jack1 as well. > And maybe rename it to jack2, if it is not too complicated ? > > I guess the maintainer of this package will have to do this. I'll search for his email. Thanks all. Jehan > We could always use provides to accommodate packages requiring JACK. > > Just some suggestions ... > > -- > André >
