Re: New maintainer

Hello Emmanuel,

On Fri, Apr 23, 2010 at 00:05, Emmanuel Rodriguez
<emmanuel rodriguez gmail com> wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 22, 2010 at 10:43 PM, Jiří Techet <techet gmail com> wrote:
>> Hi everyone,
> Hi  Jiří
>> First I would like to apply the patch I have proposed here
>> which makes it possible to compile libchamplain without memphis
>> support. Please let me know if there is something fundamentally wrong
>> with it or if it complicates bindings preparation. Otherwise I'm going
>> to apply it.
> I haven't had the opportunity to work on the project for a while so I can't
> comment too much yet. I'm guessing that making memphis an optional
> dependency will make the bindings easier to do.
>> Second, I'd like to know from the bindings maintainers what the status
>> of their bindings is and how much time they expect it will take to
>> update them for 0.6. This will influence further planning. If I'm not
>> mistaken, the maintainers of current bindings are
>> Victor - Python
>> Emmanuel - Perl
> I've been quite busy with my relocation and the birth of my first baby. I'm
> planning to continue working on the Perl bindings in May. This bindings are
> always "delayed" because of the unit tests; I think that only the Perl
> bindings have tests.
> Usually Pierre-Lic was doing releases without my bindings since I was always
> releasing them in CPAN; which is the place where all Perl developers expect
> them to be. Furthermore, the Perl bindings are not even integrated into the
> build system because no one knows how to do it.

OK, then I'll just make the release without them - no problem.

>> Tomaž - Vala
>> I'm not sure about the status of the "managed" bindings. Are they
>> still being actively maintained? If not, I would consider removing
>> them from the distribution.
> I've been thinking of removing my bindings from the main repo and to add
> them to their own repo. Maybe I should use that approach.

Yes, this is a possibility too for the bindings maintainers. The
positives are that you become independent of the mainline, on the
other hand it may need more work from you to maintain the package (and
dependencies) by yourself and development gets a bit scattered. I have
no strong preference regarding this so the decision is yours.

> In the past it happened many times that we didn't made the release deadline.
> So having a separate repo with separate release dates could be a good thing.

There have been particularly many changes in the API in this release -
I hope that things get more stable in the next releases so updating
bindings won't require so much work.


> --
> Emmanuel Rodriguez

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