On Sa, Jan 23, 2010 at 17:36:35 (CET), Benjamin Drung wrote:
> Am Samstag, den 23.01.2010, 16:12 +0100 schrieb Reinhard Tartler:
>> [ CC'ing Andrea as I'm not sure if you are actively reading our team
>> lists. I haven't seen you active since quite some time ]
>> Hi folks,
>> A few weeks ago, fabrice and I discussed dropping the -gui variant from
>> the mplayer package. Currently the situation is this:
>> - mplayer-nogui ships a copy of mplayer that does not depend on X11 and
>> related libraries. It is the commongly used variant of mplayer
>> - mplayer contains mplayer-gui, which is known to cause many problems
>> that are known to upstream but they are not interested in fixing
>> them. Have a look at the upstream archives and the bugs filed in
>> launchpad against this
>> - the 'mplayer' package ships a .desktop file with mime-type
>> associations, which makes people use mplayer-gui from filemanagers
>> like nautilus and become the impression that mplayer-gui was actually
>> supposed to work.
>> - there are various other really great 3rd party frontends for mplayer,
>> smplayer seems to be most popular, but there are also others like
>> kmplayer that work much better than the original mplayer-gui variant.
>> fabrice_sp and I discussed the possibility of dropping the mplayer-gui
>> variant and ship non-X11 version of mplayer only. If nobody objects, I
>> intend to merge the mplayer-nogui into the mplayer package, and provide
>> the nongui variant only. The next upload will probably close a large
>> amount of bugs in launchpad then.
>> If someone thinks that this was a bad idea, now would be a great time to
>> speak up!
> I am against dropping gmplayer (the gui for mplayer).
So you are in favor of leaving a known broken package in the archive for
wich better alternatives exist and causes endless pain for users without
any hope for improvement of the situation? Can you please elaborate on
> The package names can be improved. Here are my suggestions:
> * mplayer should ship the previous mplayer-nogui package.
> * gmplayer should ship the gmplayer binary (previous mplayer package)
Fine with me, the naming was taken over from marillat. I generally agree
with this suggestion, because introducing a new name for the package
would make it a bit less visible. It would still be around, though.
I guess the 'normal' upgrade path would remove gmplayer by default and
have users explicitly install the package, right?
Reinhard Tartler, KeyID 945348A4
pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list