On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 12:11:42PM +0100, Alessio Treglia wrote:
On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 12:03 PM, Jonas Smedegaard <d...@jones.dk> wrote:
This looks bad.  If it really really must use a specific version of a specific implementation (as opposed to a supposedly coordinated feature which might happen to only be available yet in a single implementation) then I strongly recommend to document that.  At least in the commit message but preferrably also e.g. in debian/README.source as well.

From jackd2's debian/changelog:

 jackd2 (1.9.6~dfsg.1-5) experimental; urgency=low

    * Add no-self-connect patch to provide better ladish support.

  -- Adrian Knoth <a...@drcomp.erfurt.thur.de>  Sat, 29 Jan 2011 19:00:05 +0100

BTW, I'll document this somewhere.

Thanks.

Still unclear to me, however, if this means ladish _must_ use only jackd2 from now on, or it is a JACK feature which jackd2 should declare through a virtual package and ladish then build-depend on.


 - 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
pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers

Reply via email to