Re: External Deps: update pwlib and opal version

["Elijah Newren" <newren gmail com>]

Karsten,

It looks like you forgot to keep Damien on the cc list.  However, some
potentially helpful info...

On 6/11/07, guenther <guenther rudersport de> wrote:
> On Thu, 2007-06-07 at 09:37 +0200, Damien Sandras wrote:
> > > > However, the unstable branch of Ekiga (ie SVN Trunk) depends on the
> > > > unstable branch of PWLIB and OPAL (ie CVS HEAD) for which there are
> > > > rarely tarballs.
>
> This, however, is bad.
>
> AFAIK, if there are no unstable releases during the development period,
> the version can not be updated to a new stable version for the next
> GNOME release, either.
>
> No unstable releases means no smoketesting. GARNOME depends on tarball
> releases, as do the official jhbuild modulesets. And I doubt much
> distros would go down the ripping-from-SVN path... This is a recurring
> topic, and we even have seen already approved, newly proposed tarballs
> being dropped off the list, just because they failed to roll a tarball.

It looks like this is already being fixed.  See the thread starting at
http://mail.gnome.org/archives/ekiga-devel-list/2007-June/msg00000.html.
:-)

> If you can find someone on your list, who can roll unstable Ekiga, opal
> and pwlib tarballs, that would be great. In case they don't have a
> gnome.org shell account, I am positive we will find volunteers to upload
> the tarballs to f.g.o. I know I would -- feel free to ping me.
>
> Even in case you don't find one to do these unstable tarballs, we most
> likely can handle this, too. Since I am not a RT member, I won't offer
> this, however, here is an IRC quote:

Why not?  You don't have to be an RT member to make tarball releases.
Very few module maintainers are one.  ;-)  I see nothing wrong with
module maintainers asking others to do releases for them.

It is true that sometimes the RT feels compelled to make a release
*without* the module maintainers approval (usually because we can't
get a hold of them and downgrading to an older version causes issues),
and that is something that should be done very sparingly, but with
maintainers approval I see no problem.  In fact, I could easily see
there becoming cases where people make releases for lots of modules
that they aren't the maintainer of.  The only risk you run is that
people start treating you as the maintainer when the maintainer goes
away.  (Just ask Vincent...)

Cheers,
Elijah