Re: [gupnp] GUPnP 0.14.1 (stable) & GUPnP 0.15.0 (unstable)

>  I agree but this was unavoidable and I did give you a chance to
> raise your voice about this:

Well I must have missed that mail (I get around 500 messages a day so
some do slip) but I have raised my voice about this in the past and my
opinion is still the same as the last time it came up which is the
same as the general rule of thumb upstream in gnome.


> Date: Fri, 1 Oct 2010 19:21:04 +0300
> Subject: Re: gupnp-av broken with latest gobject-introspection
> From: "Zeeshan Ali (Khattak)" <zeenix gmail com>
> To: Vincent Untz <vuntz gnome org>
> Cc: Ross Burton <ross burtonini com>, gupnp o-hand com
> On Fri, Oct 1, 2010 at 7:05 PM, Zeeshan Ali (Khattak) <zeenix gmail com> wr=
> ote:
>> Hi,
>> On Fri, Oct 1, 2010 at 6:29 PM, Vincent Untz <vuntz gnome org> wrote:
>>> Hey,
>>> So it broke again with a new g-i. Here's a patch to fix it.
>> =C2=A0Thanks so much for proving the patch.
>>> Note that the requirement change in might be too high for
>>> some distros, but on the other hand, it's really required...
>> =C2=A0Thats unfortuante cause bumping requirements in stable releases
>> isn't nice at all but OTOH we are still requering the stable release
>> of gir so it should be good. Let me ask the packagers if they have any
>> objections to this before we apply this and release...
>  As I said on IRC, I had misread your patch: The patch really makes
> us require latest unstable release. :( I really wouldn't want to
> depend on unstable gobject-introspection in stable releases but if its
> still much better than being broken i guess.
>  Dear distro packagers, What do you think?
> --
> To unsubscribe send a mail to gupnp+unsubscribe\
To unsubscribe send a mail to gupnp+unsubscribe\

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]