Re: [gdome]good work and some glib2 issues
- From: Sven Herzberg <herzi abi02 de>
- To: Sven Herzberg <gdome gnome org>
- Subject: Re: [gdome]good work and some glib2 issues
- Date: 26 Jun 2002 14:29:28 +0200
Am Mit, 2002-06-26 um 00.23 schrieb Enrico Zini:
> On Tue, Jun 25, 2002 at 09:57:16PM +0200, Sven Herzberg wrote:
>
> > > I think you have to talk about it to Enrico Zini. He's the man who makes
> > > debian package for gdome2.
> > I'm gonna talk to him, we only wanted to have a glib2-version of debs,
> > that can be used to create agnubis.
>
> Yiipeee!!! The Gdome2 Debian Customer Service is at your service! :-)
>
> Want some glib2 gdome2? As soon as an upstream version of gdome2 builds
> with glib2, I'll be happy to package it.
If you want to, i can send you a tarball with my source-package files.
Then you can have a look at it.
> I'm accepting suggestions on how to handle coexistance of the two
> versions. My current proposal on the matter is this:
>
> considering that:
>
> - developing with libgdome in Debian is not so spread yet
> - gnome2 is coming soon
> - woody is frozen with the current gdome2.
>
> What I plan to do is maintaining a glib1 gdome2 for woody and a glib2
> gdome2 for unstable. Parallel installations will be supported for the
> shared libraries (so that binaries for the two versions can live
> together), but -dev libraries will conflict so that only one of the two
> versions can be installed.
Even the -dev packages can be installed together, i only have to fugure
out how to deliver gdome-1.0.pc only when the glib2 build is used and
how to deliver gdome-config if the glib1.2 build is used.
> The rationale is that people with woody will develop with glib1 (as
> glib2 is not in woody), while people with the next distro will develop
> with glib2 (that will become the standard one). People with woody that
> want to develop with glib2 will have to install glib2 from unstable and
> can get libgdome2-dev from there, too.
>
> Now, if somebody needs parallel glib1 and glib2 gdome2 developing
> environments in Debian, please let me know so that I can change my mind.
> If I won't have a good reason for it, I'll gladly avoid messing with
> parallel -dev packages.
The only thing i would keep to both versions is the docs, as they should
remain the same not depending on what glib gdome2 is built on.
>
> ----------
>
> Before leaving, please take a few minutes to compile our Gdome2 Debian
> Feedback Questionary to help improve the quality of our services:
>
> 1) How do you enjoy your "Gdome2 in Debian" experience?
>
> [ ] Awesome!
> [ ] Great!
> [ ] Fine
> [X] So-so
> [ ] Enjoy?
I haven't used it a lot.
>
> 2) What would you like to see in your next Gdome2 debian package?
> (pkg-config support and gdome2-specific automake macros in
> /usr/share/aclocal are already planned)
>
> [ ] More documentation in the examples directory
> [X] Some other package actually using gdome2
> [ ] A new maintainer
Which will be agnubis once it's ready.
>
> 3) Are there any other suggestions or criticisms about the libgdome2
> Debian package? (Please be rude if you feel inclined to do so)
> No issues yet._____________________________________________________
> ___________________________________________________________________
> ___________________________________________________________________
>
> 4) Do you wish to receive our fantastic newsletter on the Gdome2 world
> directly at home free of charge?
>
> [ ] Shut up
> [ ] Shut up
lol
>
>
> Bye, Enrico
>
> --
> GPG key: 1024D/797EBFAB 2000-12-05 Enrico Zini <enrico debian org>
> _______________________________________________
> gdome mailing list
> gdome gnome org
> http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gdome
>
[
Date Prev][
Date Next] [
Thread Prev][
Thread Next]
[
Thread Index]
[
Date Index]
[
Author Index]