Re: [Banshee-List] ANNOUNCE: Mirage 0.5.0 released
- From: Gabriel Burt <gabriel burt gmail com>
- To: banshee-list gnome org
- Subject: Re: [Banshee-List] ANNOUNCE: Mirage 0.5.0 released
- Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2009 15:26:36 -0500
2009/3/10 Bertrand Lorentz <bertrand lorentz gmail com>:
> On Tue, 2009-03-10 at 18:35 +0100, Dominik Schnitzer wrote:
>> On Mon, Mar 9, 2009 at 6:40 PM, Gabriel Burt <gabriel burt gmail com> wrote:
>> > On Mon, Mar 9, 2009 at 7:04 AM, Dominik Schnitzer
>> > <dominik schnitzer ofai at> wrote:
>> >> Hi,
>> >> We are happy to release version 0.5 of the Banshee Mirage extension.
>> >> This version works with the latest stable Banshee releases (1.4).
>> > Do you think moving Mirage (or at least the Banshee-specific parts of
>> > it) into Banshee svn (soon to be git) would be a good idea?
>> Hi Gabriel,
>> I think integrating Mirage more tightly in Banshee could lead to new
>> innovative ideas besides "just" automatic playlist generation, which I
>> think would be great!
>> It would be fine for me to move the Banshee-specific parts into
>> Banshee, but maintain the Music-Similarity-Processing library
>> separately (under the GPL license). That means it's also ok (at least
>> for me, Bertrand?) to relicense the Banshee-specific stuff under the
>> permissive Banshee license.
> Obviously, I'm all for having the banshee specific parts of Mirage in
> the banshee source repository. I also have no problem with relicensing
> to the MIT/X11 license. As long as there are no actual lawyers
> involved ! ;)
> Just to make sure we're on the same page, let me write down what I'm
> thinking :
> - What is currently in the libmirageaudio/ and Mirage/ folder would
> continue to live as they currently do, and be released as a separate
> package, without any banshee dependency.
> - Banshee would have an optional dependency on that package
> - What is currently in th Banshee/ part if the mirage source code would
> be moved to banshee svn, into src/Extensions/Banshee.Mirage
> What needs to be done, IMO :
> 1/ Do a quick review of the API provided by Mirage.dll. There might be
> things that we want to change or clean up now. I have zero experience in
> API design, so suggestions are welcome !
> 2/ Move the code
> 3/ Profit ! ;)
Sounds good. Why don't you go ahead and change the licensing in the
current repo; it might be a while before we make this switch. Also,
regarding the API, unless you're going to GAC the Mirage.dll you don't
need to worry about too much about API stability. We'll include the
library at build time like we do ipod-sharp.
] [Thread Prev