On Wed, Jun 16, 2010 at 3:34 PM, Thiago Macieira <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hello
>
> We in Qt are wondering what the best option for packaging Qt for MeeGo is. The
> current situation is that we release a tarball and someone, at some point,
> applies some unknown patches and makes an RPM.
>
> Since Qt is a central piece of MeeGo, we'd like to have more visibility of
> that process. Especially on the "unknown patches" part.
>
> So my question is: how should this process be?
>
> I can think of two possibilities:
> 1) Qt is responsible for the source tarball only, with someone in the MeeGo
> team is clearly responsible for the packaging and owns the patches applied;
>
> 2) Qt is responsible for the source tarball and the RPMs for MeeGo (x86 and
> ARM). Whether the actual build is done on our hardware or in the MeeGo OBS is
> irrelevant.
<snip>
> So this is a question to all: what is the preferred method?

For what it's worth, I'd prefer option #2.

It seems a better idea to me to have the people who know the software
best responsible for maintenance/patching. I've seen some substandard
patches to Qt applied [elsewhere] in the past, and this would be one
good way to avoid that happening.

Should that not be directly preferable or possible, I'd think it would
be a nice idea to have one (or more) people who sit between the two
communities step up to handle it in a similar role: applying what
MeeGo patches are necessary to keep the stack working, but working on
forwarding them upstream in the longer term. I'd be happy to help with
such an initiative.

> --
> Thiago Macieira - thiago (AT) macieira.info - thiago (AT) kde.org
>  Senior Product Manager - Nokia, Qt Development Frameworks
>      PGP/GPG: 0x6EF45358; fingerprint:
>      E067 918B B660 DBD1 105C  966C 33F5 F005 6EF4 5358

Hope this helps,

--
Robin Burchell
http://rburchell.com
_______________________________________________
MeeGo-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.meego.com/listinfo/meego-dev

Reply via email to