Re: good work and some glib2 issues

Am Mit, 2002-06-26 um 00.23 schrieb Enrico Zini:
> On Tue, Jun 25, 2002 at 09:57:16PM +0200, Sven Herzberg wrote:
> 
> > > I think you have to talk about it to Enrico Zini. He's the man who makes
> > > debian package for gdome2.
> > I'm gonna talk to him, we only wanted to have a glib2-version of debs,
> > that can be used to create agnubis.
> 
> Yiipeee!!!  The Gdome2 Debian Customer Service is at your service!  :-)
> 
> Want some glib2 gdome2?  As soon as an upstream version of gdome2 builds
> with glib2, I'll be happy to package it.
If you want to, i can send you a tarball with my source-package files.
Then you can have a look at it.

> I'm accepting suggestions on how to handle coexistance of the two
> versions.  My current proposal on the matter is this:
> 
> considering that:
> 
>  - developing with libgdome in Debian is not so spread yet
>  - gnome2 is coming soon
>  - woody is frozen with the current gdome2.
> 
> What I plan to do is maintaining a glib1 gdome2 for woody and a glib2
> gdome2 for unstable.  Parallel installations will be supported for the
> shared libraries (so that binaries for the two versions can live
> together), but -dev libraries will conflict so that only one of the two
> versions can be installed.
Even the -dev packages can be installed together, i only have to fugure
out how to deliver gdome-1.0.pc only when the glib2 build is used and
how to deliver gdome-config if the glib1.2 build is used.

> The rationale is that people with woody will develop with glib1 (as
> glib2 is not in woody), while people with the next distro will develop
> with glib2 (that will become the standard one).  People with woody that
> want to develop with glib2 will have to install glib2 from unstable and
> can get libgdome2-dev from there, too.
> 
> Now, if somebody needs parallel glib1 and glib2 gdome2 developing
> environments in Debian, please let me know so that I can change my mind.
> If I won't have a good reason for it, I'll gladly avoid messing with
> parallel -dev packages.

The only thing i would keep to both versions is the docs, as they should
remain the same not depending on what glib gdome2 is built on.

> 
> ----------
> 
> Before leaving, please take a few minutes to compile our Gdome2 Debian
> Feedback Questionary to help improve the quality of our services:
>     
>  1) How do you enjoy your "Gdome2 in Debian" experience?
> 
>      [ ] Awesome!
>      [ ] Great!
>      [ ] Fine
>      [X] So-so
>      [ ] Enjoy?
I haven't used it a lot.
>  
>  2) What would you like to see in your next Gdome2 debian package?
>     (pkg-config support and gdome2-specific automake macros in
>      /usr/share/aclocal are already planned)
> 
>      [ ] More documentation in the examples directory
>      [X] Some other package actually using gdome2
>      [ ] A new maintainer
Which will be agnubis once it's ready.
> 
>  3) Are there any other suggestions or criticisms about the libgdome2
>     Debian package?  (Please be rude if you feel inclined to do so)
>     No issues yet._____________________________________________________
>     ___________________________________________________________________
>     ___________________________________________________________________
> 
>  4) Do you wish to receive our fantastic newsletter on the Gdome2 world
>     directly at home free of charge?
> 
>      [ ] Shut up
>      [ ] Shut up
lol
> 
> 
> Bye, Enrico
> 
> --
> GPG key: 1024D/797EBFAB 2000-12-05 Enrico Zini <[email protected]>
> _______________________________________________
> gdome mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gdome
>