| 1 |
I am not a gentoo developer, but a user, but I have submitted several |
| 2 |
fixes for dvdrip in the past, and plan on continuing to use it, and get |
| 3 |
it running and working in gentoo. I would be happy to maintain it, or |
| 4 |
simply try to more responsively post fixes in the future to Bugzilla if |
| 5 |
it would keep this package alive in portage. I think it is a very good |
| 6 |
dvd ripping utility, and it _does_ work w/ transcode-1, the dvdrip |
| 7 |
upstream developer simply still bases his work off of 0.6.x. He is |
| 8 |
currently considering moving to transcode-1, so I doubt this package |
| 9 |
will need to continue to be dependant on the difficult to manage |
| 10 |
transcode version. |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
As a user currently, what steps could I take to help this package stay |
| 13 |
alive? I will take them as the alternative is to put an unofficial |
| 14 |
ebuild up on a webpage. |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
-Chandler Carruth |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
Roy Marples wrote: |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
>On Thursday 08 December 2005 20:23, Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò wrote: |
| 21 |
> |
| 22 |
> |
| 23 |
>>On Thursday 08 December 2005 21:10, Mike Frysinger wrote: |
| 24 |
>> |
| 25 |
>> |
| 26 |
>>>so the video herd policy is to remove packages until you're left with |
| 27 |
>>>a small enough subset of packages you can handle ? |
| 28 |
>>> |
| 29 |
>>> |
| 30 |
>>No, it's to remove the packages that have problems, that requires |
| 31 |
>>dependencies that are badly broken (transcode 0.6 is a pain to manage, does |
| 32 |
>>not work with GCC4 and it's not easily fixable, and upstream moved to |
| 33 |
>>transcode 1), that requires maintenance and nobody can give it, and that |
| 34 |
>>might be replaced by other programs with way less troubles... |
| 35 |
>> |
| 36 |
>> |
| 37 |
> |
| 38 |
>To be fair, you can hardly count GCC4 as it's not even in our unstable tree |
| 39 |
>yet (and yes, I know it will be soon). |
| 40 |
> |
| 41 |
>Ya know, dhcpcd was in the same state. Unmaintained, didn't compile with GCC4 |
| 42 |
>and upstream was dead. Didn't hear any calls to remove it from the tree |
| 43 |
>though as it was (and still is I suppose) the default dhcp client even though |
| 44 |
>all the others are coded much better. |
| 45 |
> |
| 46 |
> |
| 47 |
> |
| 48 |
>>If you want to maintain that, no need for it to be removed... atm it's |
| 49 |
>>going to be unmaintained in the tree, full of problems, and requires us to |
| 50 |
>>not plan of dropping transcode 0.6. |
| 51 |
>> |
| 52 |
>> |
| 53 |
> |
| 54 |
>I have no wish to maintain it, but if it compiles then there is no need to |
| 55 |
>remove it. So it's unmaintained - so was openvpn and net-misc/dhcp for pretty |
| 56 |
>much a year or so until I stepped up. |
| 57 |
> |
| 58 |
>So if no-one steps up then let it sit in the tree if people are using it. |
| 59 |
> |
| 60 |
>Roy |
| 61 |
> |
| 62 |
> |
| 63 |
> |
| 64 |
-- |
| 65 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives