Hi Jaromír (and others), On Fri, Apr 02, 2010 at 07:18:38AM -0400, Eric Dantan Rzewnicki wrote:
On Fri, Apr 02, 2010 at 12:06:21PM +0200, Jaromír Mikeš wrote:
I just notice that jamin 0.97.14~cvs~81203-2 is not installing it's runtime dependency swh-plugins.Should I fill bugreport or just inform this way is fine?
Probably best to file a bug so it doesn't get lost.
I agree with Eric generally: Best to always file a bugreport when you notice an bug, no matter how tiny: It is quite easy to close again if it turns out to be a non-issue (if you ever have the sad experience of being yelled at for filing a "wrong" bugreport then just ignore it: bugreports are generally highly appreciated, despite a few developers misunderstanding their purpose. :-)
...but this particular one is hereby on my radar:I am to blame for recently lowering the dependency on swh-plugins to a recommendation, with other LDASP plugins fullfilling same.
Are the swh-plugins _always_ needed for _all_ uses of JAMin? Are perhaps _some_ LADSPA plugin _always_ needed for _all_ uses? Kind regards, - Jonas -- * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt * Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website: http://dr.jones.dk/ [x] quote me freely [ ] ask before reusing [ ] keep private
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list firstname.lastname@example.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers