On Mon, 20 Dec 2010 04:33:40 -0800 (PST)
Vivian Zhang <[email protected]> wrote:

> Hi,
> I have made the following changes to pulseaudio in project
> Trunk:Testing. Please review and accept ASAP.
> 
> Thank You,
> Vivian Zhang
> 
> [This message was auto-generated]
> 
> ---
> 
> Request #11064:
> 
>   submit:   devel:multimedia/pulseaudio(r13) ->
> Trunk:Testing/pulseaudio
> 
> 
> Message:
>     Reversion to 0.9.19 and apply the patches from UMG (BMC 11252)
> 
> State:   new          2010-12-20T04:33:37 vivian
> Comment: None
> 
> 
>  
> changes files:
> --------------
> --- pulseaudio.changes
> +++ pulseaudio.changes
> @@ -0,0 +1,5 @@
> +* Mon Dec 20 2010 Vivian Zhang <[email protected]> - 0.9.19
> +- Downgrade pulseaduio to 0.9.19 and clean the patches
> +- Added patches from Fabien Barthes for building specific mfld
> packages of pulseaudio (BMC#11252) +- Added the handset specific
> alsa-mixer paths & profile-sets files to pulseaudio-mfld-settings
> package +
> 

Ok, I will sacrifice myself for the benefit of saying what no one else
appears to be willing to say, but...

WTH!!!!

Downgrading a version of one of the core architecture elements seems
completely broken to me!  Why are we doing this, especially since we
already have officially released 1.1 with 0.9.21 version of PA?

I assume there are MeeGo 1.1 -> 1.2 upgrade plans/paths, so how will
this go when we are downgrading the API version?

What about those who have already started developing plugin modules to
the 0.9.21 API, I assume all these will be at risk for breaking too?!?!

I mean really, how can we even be willing to consider this, or am I just
being completely dense here (or missing some key, as yet still secret
or embarrassing piece of relevant details)?

Seriously?

Shane...
_______________________________________________
MeeGo-packaging mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.meego.com/listinfo/meego-packaging

Reply via email to