> So you think the best solution is: > * Do not require gnome-vfs >= 2.6 in configure.in > * and let the bug stay there for those suing earlier version? > > Well, I think configure.in should state the real requirements, but I > understand what the problem is. I see two solutions: > a) packagers patch configure.in themselves so they can compile against > gnome-vfs < 2.6 > b) we revert the requirement from cvs. But the code to load static > images won't work properly with old gnome-vfs. > > I would do a), but can do b) immediately if you feel is the the right > way to proceed. Both a) and b) are fine with me. If we are going for a), that's perfect. (Kilian any comments?). If we are going for b), we have to not forget to put the requirement again later when GNOME 2.6 is available everywhere.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Ceci est une partie de message =?ISO-8859-1?Q?num=E9riquement?= =?ISO-8859-1?Q?_sign=E9e?=