On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 04:08:33PM +0200, Ondřej Surý wrote: > Package: tech-ctte > Severity: normal > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > Dear Technical Committee, > > I have raised the question of libjpeg8 vs. jpeg-turbo as a default > libjpeg library for Debian in debian-devel[1], but we were not able to > reach a consensus. I spoke to our DPL and he recommended to fill a > tech-ctte bug, since this is exactly the kind of problems the > tech-ctte should have final word. > > 1. <CALjhHG9iNiA6kXfo0M+vgo-+xGZjpiX8jNXJguXv=rec9de...@mail.gmail.com> > > The current libjpeg* world looks like this (Bill please correct me > if I made a mistake somewhere). > > There's a IJG libjpeg implementation (where IJG has nothing to do with > former IJG which created libjpeg6). The current maintainer (Guido > Vollbeding) of IJG libjpeg is adding library features not blessed by > JPEG commitee and he seems to add new features he pushes without > coordination of ISO (SmartScale). Also it seems that current IJG is > not very healthy open-source project - the upstream maintainer seems > to be hostile and there's no bug tracker, no mailing list, no online > repository, no instructions how to propose new feature, where to send > bugfixes etc.
I am not going to answer such drivel. You will have to contend with what I sent to debian-devel. Show a bit of respect. It has never been required of free software projects to restrict themselves to the features mandated by a standard. Cheers, -- Bill. <ballo...@debian.org> Imagine a large red swirl here. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
