Hi Mihai and Rex! On Thu, 18 Mar 2004 12:45:12 +0200, Mihai Maties wrote: > I would be interested in taking over the K3b package. I believe that you are > already familiar with some of the work I did regarding packaging for the > original K3b developer/maintainer. I would just need to get to know the > fedora.us policies a little better... On Thu, 18 Mar 2004 06:48:20 -0600 (CST), Rex Dieter wrote: > I volunteer to maintain the k3b package. I'm already maintaining the > package for the kde-redhat project. Throwing it at the fedora.us queue > won't be too much more work. It doesn't matter to me who maintains the package (might be different for you, if you want to get credits) provided that the package builds and works. I think mine does. Yet this particular update request has never seen more than one review at once since 2003-12-04 (version 0.10.3, now we're at v0.11.6). So, I see myself unable to get fixes published (e.g. the desktop integration to make it work when installed from within GNOME on rh9 and fc1). That it can be more difficult to package for fedora.us, e.g. due to missing mp3 support and building for multiple platforms from a single src.rpm or trying to make it co-exist with "Arson", is another matter. I've solved the mp3 and KDE 3.1/3.2 issues with conditional code, so e.g. building an mp3 plugin package for rpm.livna.org is trivial, albeit makes the spec file more ugly. The alternative would be to build for "livna" only. Justin M. Forbes has mentioned that k3b might be included with fc2, maybe in test3, with the i18n files merged. If that happened, fedora.us k3b maintainance would be reduced to fc1 and rh9. --
