Re: packaging jack - cross-distro coordination

2010-04-24 Thread Eric Dantan Rzewnicki
On Sat, Apr 24, 2010 at 06:38:09AM -0500, Gabriel M. Beddingfield wrote: > On Sat, 24 Apr 2010, Jonas Smedegaard wrote: >> On Sat, Apr 24, 2010 at 02:39:16AM +0200, Adrian Knoth wrote: >>> We instantly switch to jackd2. End of the story. >> Thanks for a clear cut message. >> I can accept that. > Fo

Re: packaging jack - cross-distro coordination

2010-04-24 Thread Reinhard Tartler
On Fri, Apr 23, 2010 at 22:11:15 (CEST), Jonas Smedegaard wrote: > > Regarding options: > > Let me try summarize anew, given my new understanding (dropping > potentially provocative names): > > a) Stay with jackd1, ignoring jackd2 and tchack. > b) Switch to jackd2, abandoning jackd1 and ignorin

Re: packaging jack - cross-distro coordination

2010-04-24 Thread Gabriel M. Beddingfield
On Sat, 24 Apr 2010, Jonas Smedegaard wrote: On Sat, Apr 24, 2010 at 02:39:16AM +0200, Adrian Knoth wrote: We instantly switch to jackd2. End of the story. Thanks for a clear cut message. I can accept that. For Squeeze, I'm OK with this, too. -gabriel _

Re: packaging jack - cross-distro coordination

2010-04-24 Thread Free Ekanayaka
Hi, |--==> On Sat, 24 Apr 2010 09:11:27 +0200, Reinhard Tartler said: RT> On Sat, Apr 24, 2010 at 09:00:17 (CEST), Jonas Smedegaard wrote: >>On Sat, Apr 24, 2010 at 02:39:16AM +0200, Adrian Knoth wrote: >> >>>We instantly switch to jackd2. End of the story. >> >>Thanks for a clear c

Re: packaging jack - cross-distro coordination

2010-04-24 Thread Reinhard Tartler
On Sat, Apr 24, 2010 at 09:00:17 (CEST), Jonas Smedegaard wrote: > On Sat, Apr 24, 2010 at 02:39:16AM +0200, Adrian Knoth wrote: > >>We instantly switch to jackd2. End of the story. > > Thanks for a clear cut message. > > I can accept that. > > If noone else has a say against it within the next 24

Re: packaging jack - cross-distro coordination

2010-04-24 Thread Jonas Smedegaard
On Sat, Apr 24, 2010 at 02:39:16AM +0200, Adrian Knoth wrote: We instantly switch to jackd2. End of the story. Thanks for a clear cut message. I can accept that. If noone else has a say against it within the next 24h (where I am busy anyway attending some family business) I will release jac

Re: packaging jack - cross-distro coordination

2010-04-23 Thread Adrian Knoth
On Fri, Apr 23, 2010 at 01:48:01PM +0200, Reinhard Tartler wrote: > > * conservative: Stay with jackd1, ignoring jackd2 and tchack. > > * stubborn: Switch to jackd2, abandoning jackd1 and ignoring tchack. > > * bold: switch to supporting multiple implementations. > > > > You seem to want the st

Re: packaging jack - cross-distro coordination

2010-04-23 Thread Jonas Smedegaard
On Fri, Apr 23, 2010 at 01:48:01PM +0200, Reinhard Tartler wrote: On Wed, Apr 21, 2010 at 13:30:55 (CEST), Jonas Smedegaard wrote: I don't understand the libjack-0.116.0 thing. Is that going to be the package name? If so, that sounds like we would be repeating the libjack0.100.0 mistake. I

Re: packaging jack - cross-distro coordination

2010-04-23 Thread Reinhard Tartler
On Wed, Apr 21, 2010 at 13:30:55 (CEST), Jonas Smedegaard wrote: I don't understand the libjack-0.116.0 thing. Is that going to be the package name? If so, that sounds like we would be repeating the libjack0.100.0 mistake. >>> >>> It is more like an add-on tag, indicating the libr

Re: packaging jack - cross-distro coordination

2010-04-21 Thread Jonas Smedegaard
On Wed, Apr 21, 2010 at 12:09:50PM +0200, Reinhard Tartler wrote: On Wed, Apr 21, 2010 at 09:45:22 (CEST), Jonas Smedegaard wrote: On Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 07:48:26PM -0500, Gabriel M. Beddingfield wrote: On Tue, 20 Apr 2010, Jonas Smedegaard wrote: Let me then adjust and refine my proposal