Re: [GNU-linux-libre] NONFSDG: Audacious plugins, Xchat

[Karl Goetz]

On Mon, 27 Sep 2010 10:10:44 +0200
jaromil <address@hidden> wrote:

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA256
> 
> 
> re all,
> 
> On Sun, Sep 26, 2010 at 10:24:07PM +0200, Sam Geeraerts wrote:
> > Some new proposed additions for the non-FSDG list:
> >
> > * Audacious plugins: more specifically the PSF plugin. It contains
> > code released under the MAME license [1].
> > * Xchat: has one URL handler by default, to open URLs with the Opera
> > browser. Only visible in context menu if Opera is installed, but
> > always visible in the settings. Upstream bug report [2].
> 
> it would be unfortunate to eliminate software packages because of such

Certainly would.

> details, IMHO. but then if one of us proceeds patching the software,
> how will that patch be integrated into the various gnu libre
> distributions?

I think this has been discussed before on this list, but i may be
confusing it with another list.

> one solution i see is just provide a .patch for the upstream code and
> leave distro developers and mantainers apply it every time they make a
> new release: a minimal, short term solution.

Not really. its /the/ solution if upstream doesn't want to accept the
patch.
One of the big problems with this is different distros with different
versions of applications trying to use the same patches as code evolves.

> a long term solution can be that of setting up and mantaining a
> "buildbot" with public repositories for various distributions, hosting
> liberated packages that we patch and make available for the
> public. internally at dyne.org we have such a buildbot to test

I don't really see this as a better solution for distributions then the
first tbh. For the public? perhaps better. for us? not a whole lot.

> upstream development of software: builds at every new commit and
> reports failure on building on various platforms (via mail or irc),
> ATM we have 32 and 64 bit debian, fedora, gentoo and ubuntu.

I've thought about such things for various projects im involved in, but
maintaining it and debugging requires much time/effort/skill then i
have to hand.

> the second approach is an ambitious one for the gnu linux libre
> project, is there someone willing to collaborate on it? obviously a
> liberated package repository can also be managed by individual
> distributions, but i'm sure that mantaining a single buildbot
> server/farm (easily setup with cowbuilder) can relief a lot of
> system administration hassles for many of us.

I can see a lot of potential issues, but there are potential gains too.
Yay for a pointless statement (perhaps i should try and make it into
something useful tomorrow ;))

> an ideal partner to host us could be the compile farm for GCC,
> mantained by Laurent Guerby http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/CompileFarm
> 
> excusez-moi pour le rêves de grandeur :)

um...? :)
kk

-- 
Karl Goetz, (Kamping_Kaiser / VK5FOSS)
Debian contributor / gNewSense Maintainer
http://www.kgoetz.id.au
No, I won't join your social networking group

signature.asc
Description: PGP signature