Hans de Goede wrote:
Hi All,
I'm currently working on upgrading asc (Advanced Strategic Command) to
2.0.1.0 When packaging asc-1.16.4.0, I also packaged SDLmm-0.1.8 and
paragui-1.0.4.
[snip information on SDLmm and paragui being dead upstream. Bugfixes
present in the copies in asc. Merging of paragui non-trivial due to
reformat of the source.]
Are there any objections against this?
The options I see in decreasing order of preference are:
1) Get the asc maintainers to take over maintenance of SDLmm and paragui
2) Create paragui/paragui-devel and SDL-mm/SDL-mm-devel packages from
the asc source tarball.
3) Use a private copy of SDL-mm and paragui inside the asc binary rpm.
If you've explored #1 and are planning on doing #2 I have no objections.
If you're going to do #3 I'd like to know why you favor it over #2.
-Toshio
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
