Hi Adrian,

On Thu, Apr 29, 2010 at 04:18:54PM +0200, Adrian Knoth wrote:

It looks like the branches in our jackd repo have been merged. Was this intended?

Yes, it was intended.

Once upon a time (some weeks ago) we decided to switch from jackd1 to jackd2, without looking back, i.e. treating jackd2 as the successor of jackd1 replacing it completely.

Back then I merged the git.

Later we discussed again, and decided (mainly on your recommendation) to _first_ switch jackd1 to jackd2 and then maybe later add jackd1 back again as an optional alternative, keeping jackd2 as the default main implementation of JACK.

I had jackd1 in master/upstream and jackd2 in master.jackd2/upstream.jackd2. Given that we want to re-introduce jackd1, it might be a good idea to fix this (if possible). OTOH, we could create a dedicated jackd1 repo later, too.

It is easy to spawn a dedicated jackd1 branch later.

It is also easy to throw away my latest work done after the merge. I would not like that, though. It seems to me that it makes best sense for the git to reflect our packaging: default JACK is now jackd2.

 - 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