Hello, everyone!
On Wed, 20 Jan 2010 23:04:07 +0100, Martin wrote:
> I have no problem with renaming pthsem into pth, if this is wanted by
> the "community". I don't want to do a hostile takeover of pth.
>
> But this needs coordination with the other distributions shipping pth.
> If one of the b
On Fri, Jan 22, 2010 at 08:08:03PM +0100, Ralf S. Engelschall wrote:
> This seems like a Debian related discussion. But as the author of
> GNU Pth I can at least say that I've never heard of "pthsem"
> myself (if I received any email, then, sorry, it seems it was
> filtered by the anti-spam stuff)
On 20.01.10 23:04, Martin Koegler wrote:
On Wed, Jan 20, 2010 at 10:06:21PM +0100, Julien Cristau wrote:
On Wed, Jan 20, 2010 at 21:04:30 +0100, Marc Leeman wrote:
I need pthsem, so I only want a working version with all features I
need.
All I care about is that there is an agreement between
Marc Leeman wrote:
> > (OTOH, speaking generally, it is sad to see a package "reborn"
> > under another name just because
>
> Don't read to much into this;
Well, as a matter of fact I don't. Probably I wouldn't have replied
to the thread if pth wasn't a GNU package, but my opinion would be the
> (OTOH, speaking generally, it is sad to see a package "reborn" under
> another name just because the prospective new maintainer cannot
> communicate successfully with the original one to negotiate the
> takeover. I once again urge you to write to to
> avoid this unpleasant scenario.)
Don't rea
Martin Koegler wrote:
> I must admit, that I have not read anything about GNU maintainers,
> but GNU has usually a bigger "philosophical overhead".
Then I suggest you to read the appropriate documenation [1] before
jumping to premature and possibly incorrect conclusions (what does the
phrase "phil
Martin Koegler, le Wed 20 Jan 2010 23:04:07 +0100, a écrit :
> On Wed, Jan 20, 2010 at 10:06:21PM +0100, Julien Cristau wrote:
> > On Wed, Jan 20, 2010 at 21:04:30 +0100, Marc Leeman wrote:
> >
> > > > I need pthsem, so I only want a working version with all features I
> > > > need.
> > >
> > > A
Julien Cristau, le Wed 20 Jan 2010 22:06:21 +0100, a écrit :
> I'm not sure we care if its homepage is at GNU or elsewhere.
Agreed, thanks free software :)
Samuel
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@list
On Wed, Jan 20, 2010 at 10:06:21PM +0100, Julien Cristau wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 20, 2010 at 21:04:30 +0100, Marc Leeman wrote:
>
> > > I need pthsem, so I only want a working version with all features I
> > > need.
> >
> > All I care about is that there is an agreement between the Debian
> > commun
On Wed, Jan 20, 2010 at 21:04:30 +0100, Marc Leeman wrote:
> > I need pthsem, so I only want a working version with all features I
> > need.
>
> All I care about is that there is an agreement between the Debian
> community and the upstream developer. Martin is very active in
> supporting his envi
On Mi, Jan 20, 2010 at 21:04:30 (CET), Marc Leeman wrote:
> An alternative for Martin is probably to include/hide pthsem in bcusdk;
> but that would not be as clean IMHO (ffmpeg anyone?)
I don't get the connection with ffmpeg. please elaborate.
--
Gruesse/greetings,
Reinhard Tartler, KeyID 9453
> I need pthsem, so I only want a working version with all features I
> need.
All I care about is that there is an agreement between the Debian
community and the upstream developer. Martin is very active in
supporting his environment and in that respect I am to inclined to
support his decision.
C
On Tue, Jan 19, 2010 at 10:48:24AM +0100, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> Martin Koegler, le Tue 19 Jan 2010 09:27:07 +0100, a écrit :
> > Samuel Thibault wrote:
> > > Marc Leeman, le Sun 17 Jan 2010 22:16:17 +0100, a écrit :
> > > > * Package name: pthsem
> > >
> > > Mmm, could this perhaps rather
Samuel Thibault wrote:
> Martin Koegler, le Tue 19 Jan 2010 09:27:07 +0100, a écrit :
> > Samuel Thibault wrote:
> > > Marc Leeman, le Sun 17 Jan 2010 22:16:17 +0100, a écrit :
> > > > * Package name: pthsem
> > > Mmm, could this perhaps rather be just a patch added to the
> > > existing pth p
On Tue, Jan 19, 2010 at 10:48 AM, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> Martin Koegler, le Tue 19 Jan 2010 09:27:07 +0100, a écrit :
>> Samuel Thibault wrote:
>> > Marc Leeman, le Sun 17 Jan 2010 22:16:17 +0100, a écrit :
>> > > * Package name : pthsem
>> >
[..]
>
> The problem is that people know pth, but
Martin Koegler, le Tue 19 Jan 2010 09:27:07 +0100, a écrit :
> Samuel Thibault wrote:
> > Marc Leeman, le Sun 17 Jan 2010 22:16:17 +0100, a écrit :
> > > * Package name: pthsem
> >
> > Mmm, could this perhaps rather be just a patch added to the existing pth
> > package? Else you'll have to s
Samuel Thibault wrote:
> Marc Leeman, le Sun 17 Jan 2010 22:16:17 +0100, a écrit :
> > * Package name: pthsem
>
> Mmm, could this perhaps rather be just a patch added to the existing pth
> package? Else you'll have to share the Debian patches.
The situation with GNU pth is:
* pth in debian
Marc Leeman, le Sun 17 Jan 2010 22:16:17 +0100, a écrit :
> * Package name: pthsem
Mmm, could this perhaps rather be just a patch added to the existing pth
package? Else you'll have to share the Debian patches.
Samuel
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Marc Leeman
* Package name: pthsem
Version : 2.0.7
Upstream Author : Martin Koegler
* URL : http://www.auto.tuwien.ac.at/~mkoegler/index.php
* License : GPL
Programming Lang: C
Description : pth replacement with
19 matches
Mail list logo
