-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Sat, 17 Dec 2005, Jeroen van Wolffelaar wrote: > You dropped a package from the archive because it takes too long to > index a large audio library over a slow remote-mounted directory? > > Really, thats' pretty ridiculous. Once you install daapd, it begins > the indexing immediately. Once it's done there's no delay on bootup. > > I've had sendmail lock up a box on bootup for 15 minutes because it > doesn't have a working DNS resolver, but you never see sendmail > getting taken out of distributions. > > Can I file a bux report against Firefox because large pages take to > long to load on a 28.8 modem? > > I'm not sure what use this bug report will be, it's not like you can > force someone to keep maintaining a package, but I want my extreme > disgust and displeasure to go on record.
Hi Christopher, I was the maintainer that put daapd in Debian for a while. Its removal was discouraging to me too. I don't have the time to dig up all the documentation right now, so I am going from memory, and I might have part of the story wrong. Mostly, the problem was bickering over some arcane and poorly defined objections to the Apple ACSL license, which applied to some code that might possibly have made it into mdnsresponder and/or libhowl (see #289856). Some people insisted that mdnsresponder and howl be removed from the archive, and these people apparently outranked the people that felt that the license "issues" did not merit removal, so that's what happened. There is no free implementation of mDNS that could have reasonably replaced them for daapd's purposes, so that was effectively the end of daapd. The bug you saw (294934) was only mentioned in passing, as part of the licensing debate. At that point somebody else filed the RM request and happened to reference the unimportant bug (294934). That must be the reason you got the impression that this was "the" reason I asked for the package to be removed, but that wasn't the case. So anyway, it is lame that daapd was forced out, and if you feel that this kind of amateur license lawyering is a waste of time and destructive to the Debian project, I would be inclined to agree with you. Myself, I still use Debian and Ubuntu, but I no longer attempt to contribute. I got tired of writing 1,000 lines of email and overhead (and reading 10,000) for every 10 lines of actual hacking, so I handed off my other packages and let my DD application die. If you've got more time and patience than I do, by all means, you are welcome to revive the daapd package. Have fun.. M.D. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFDpNTRQBZkSjT8gWoRAr/KAKCImP5zKZ5R4NI0R+4zMMfGtaKRSQCgrNM2 A7gdtBhJ1l4ocp0idoc5iz4= =0+RF -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
