On Thursday 18 March 2004 19:37, Michael Schwendt wrote: > 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. > > 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. I think that this paragraph reffers to me mostly since Rex is using exactly your src.rpm to build the packages. I am aware of the policies involved and my intention was to continue packaging K3b for fedora.us based on your spec file not mine. I have not decided yet if I'll drop my K3b repository or continue the work to provide "bleeding-edge" K3b experience for those who want it, but one thing is certain: the fedora.us packages and xcyb packages will be more compatible in the future... :) > 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. Great news. Mihai
