I believe I do understand, and think that we have a good plan. Some
users can't or don't want to use distro packages and want newer
software, so your upstream repo would be helpful for them. Other users
can't or don't want to use upstream third-party repos and want distro
version upgrades to be more likely to work, and so the distro packages
(which you would not be expected to help maintain) would be helpful for
them. I don't see any reason why we shouldn't have both. If you'd like,
I might even be able to help with packaging for the upstream repos.
(If it's any consolation, users will oftentimes go and get upstream
packages and then come to distro package maintainers for help, so I get
the frustration of users seeking support from the wrong places :P)
Aaron
On 10/6/23 03:12, Jaak Ristioja wrote:
Please understand, that we might nevertheless decide to host our own
Fedora repository for BibleTime as well.
BibleTime developers are not responsible for packages we did not
create ourselves, but when issues with these packages arise many users
still complain directly to us. Oftentimes they just ask for some newer
version of BibleTime to be packaged for their platform. Many
distributions also have restrictive packaging policies which prevent
introducing new (major) versions of packages to stable distribution
versions. Hosting our own repositories might help in that regard and
we would also not be tied to having to support older versions of
BibleTime we no longer can or wish to support. We have very limited
resources and can't afford to manage BibleTime within distribution
repositories.
On 06.10.23 09:58, Aaron Rainbolt wrote:
No worries there, I would be doing all the work of managing BibleTime
within the Fedora repositories, the devs wouldn't have to do extra
work for that to happen.
If the BibleTime developers are interested in hosting their own repos
for other distros, that's certainly their option (and a good idea in
my opinion), however having BibleTime directly in distribution repos
will obviously make it easier for end-users to install and use it, so
I'd like to make that happen by maintaining the package in Fedora. (I
also have experience with Debian packaging so if the current Debian
maintainer gives up on it, I might be able to help there too.)
On Fri, Oct 6, 2023 at 1:42 AM Jaak Ristioja <j...@ristioja.ee> wrote:
Hi,
On 05.10.23 20:59, Aaron Rainbolt wrote:
Thanks! If all of the comaintainers for Xiphos and BibleTime are
also no
longer available or interested, I think it would be helpful if you
could
go into https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/xiphos and
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/bibletime and click the "Orphan"
button on those. I'll take them once that's done and should be able to
help keep them maintained.
BibleTime would be interested in hosting their own package repositories
for different distributions and their versions, which would be updated
by the CI (see [1]) and perhaps be of low maintenance burden. We don't
have the resources to commit to managing BibleTime packages under the
umbrella of different distros.
Best regards,
J
[1]: https://github.com/bibletime/bibletime/issues/258
_______________________________________________
sword-devel mailing list: sword-devel@crosswire.org
http://crosswire.org/mailman/listinfo/sword-devel
Instructions to unsubscribe/change your settings at above page
_______________________________________________
sword-devel mailing list: sword-devel@crosswire.org
http://crosswire.org/mailman/listinfo/sword-devel
Instructions to unsubscribe/change your settings at above page
_______________________________________________
sword-devel mailing list: sword-devel@crosswire.org
http://crosswire.org/mailman/listinfo/sword-devel
Instructions to unsubscribe/change your settings at above page
_______________________________________________
sword-devel mailing list: sword-devel@crosswire.org
http://crosswire.org/mailman/listinfo/sword-devel
Instructions to unsubscribe/change your settings at above page
