On 2013-03-28, Jan Zelený <jzeleny@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 28. 3. 2013 at 13:53:15, Vít Ondruch wrote: >> >> My point is: "First step to find technical solution for some issue is >> admit that there is some issue". > > Exactly my point. I want to find out if there is really a technical or > at least semi-technical issue or not. Saying "multiple versions of > a single package should be installable" is a "what", not a "why". We > need to figure out the "why" if we want to know if there is really an > issue that actually needs to be addressed. > E.g. this post has been sent to <icecast-dev@xxxxxxxx> an hour ago: > Subject: Re: [Icecast-dev] Packages of icecast 2.4-beta? > > > > At Sourcefabric we are testing Opus streams from the Airtime > > broadcast automation system via Icecast 2.4-beta. Other developers > > in our community are testing video streaming with Theora. We would > > like to make it easier for our users to try this Icecast beta > > themselves. > > That is sadly a typical problem with most distributions. I wonder > what would be a good way to handle this gracefully. > > > Would it be premature for us to release a backported .deb package of > > icecast 2.4-beta for Debian and Ubuntu, or would the additional > > feedback from our community be welcome? > > > > We would of course make it very clear that this package would not > > yet be recommended for production use, and as such it would not go > > into our official repository until the code was declared stable by > > the Icecast team. > > My preferred approach would be to explain how to merge the debian > packaging with a more recent tar-ball and rebuild a package out of > this. I actually plan to include that on icecast.org, alongside > a similar description for Fedora/RHEL/Centos. > > I do realize that this necessitates additional steps that might be > error prone. So a PPA approach might be easier for interested parties. > > When it comes to the 2.4 beta I actually made the conscious decision > to version it so that no extensions to the version number itself are > necessary to ensure a clean upgrade path. Beta1 is 2.3.99.0. Or we see for more than a month a broken dependency between perl-Math-Clipper (Perl binding) and clipper (C++ library) because clipper has changed API, there is no new perl-Math-Clipper yet and even if it was, it would break API with libraries and applications using perl-Math-Clipper. -- Petr -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
