On Sat, Apr 24, 2010 at 02:18:16AM +0200, Adrian Knoth wrote:
On Fri, Apr 23, 2010 at 05:52:35PM -0500, Gabriel M. Beddingfield wrote:

On Fri, Apr 23, 2010 at 02:32:45PM -0500, Gabriel M. Beddingfield wrote:
[1] http://trac.jackaudio.org/wiki/SuggestedPackagingApproach

Note that this is a wiki and the suggestions come from only one person.

True, but Nedko (the author of the article) shouldn't be ignored. He is very knowledgeable and respected in the LAD/Jack communities.

Furthermore, he is saying the exact same thing that Torben and I have been saying.

I mostly agree with the suggested packaging except "jackd", "jackdbus" and "jack server library" being separate packages.

Not that it'd be wrong, but the amount of packages seems unnecessarily high. There are even people who suggest to put everything in a single jackd1/jackd2 package, but we probably don't want to go this far.

I actually am positive about separateing into more packages like that. But let's discuss that later, after switch to jackd2 is in place.

I.e. please remind me if I forget myself to get back to this issue :-)

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

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list

Reply via email to