Hi Arne, I raised some questions about the use of your lib, but there were nothing personal :) I was worried because I got the impression openwengo has already a huge number of dependencies and a record for patching upstream sources, complicating the work for packaging purposes on the various linux distros. So I just wanted to be sure they took their time to evaluate all aspects of the proposal.
Now, I really thank you for the clarifications, they are really appreciated. On 12/28/05, Arne Caspari <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I think users ( and projects using the library ) are > better of with the .tar.gz releases since the ought to be tested by me > in some way. I agree on this. It is also a problem for me (as a packager) when some of the dependencies are based on CVS HEAD. > > Of course if there is really a demand for CVS, I could reconsidder using > it again ( especially when sourceforge comes around to use SVN which > should work even better for me ). Since you seem to be the only developer, a simple solution would be to use a local CVS repo in your machine, and synchronize the sf.net from time to time when you have net access. > > The next issue is the lack of documentation and I admit it is a problem. > I have this on the list but the main goal of this library is to keep it > as simple as possible so there should not be a problem in understanding > the API. Maybe this could improve over time. > > To the question whether the project is still active: It is indeed > active. Great. This was my primary concern (and the lack of CVS did not allow me to check for activity). I would only like to ask you if you are going to evaluate patches coming from openwengo, for an eventual inclusion in future releases. Cheers Gianluca _______________________________________________ Wengophone-devel mailing list [email protected] http://dev.openwengo.com/mailman/listinfo/wengophone-devel
