> On Fri, 2007-12-28 at 16:10 +0100, Nils Philippsen wrote: >> On Fri, 2007-12-28 at 11:52 +0000, Andrew Haley wrote: >> >> > I don't get it. Where's the problem? Upstream refuses to produce an >> > update? >> >> Upstream seems reluctant to release new versions, the last one is from >> March 2005. > > A failure to release an update in almost 3 years is usually the result > of one of three things: > > 1) The software is finally stable and doesn't need frequent updates. > 2) The maintainer has no faith in the software in general. > 3) The maintainer doesn't actually want (or is pathologically unable) to > maintain the software. > > Since the first obviously isn't true, one of the latter two must be. In > my mind both of those cases are valid reasons for eventually orphaning > the package if the situation doesn't improve. I for one see no reason why a well-tested SVN version can't be packaged. See gnubg. The stable release is defined as a particular SVN version, not a particular tarball. Some upstreams, like xmoto's for example, will provide you the SVN version numbers to allow you to take two check outs and create your own patches. I did this for xmoto 0.3.3, so we could fix a bug fixed in 0.3.4 before 0.3.4 came out. Bought us several weeks of functionality. > -- > Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams <ivazqueznet@xxxxxxxxx> > > PLEASE don't CC me; I'm already subscribed > -- > fedora-devel-list mailing list > fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list -- novus ordo absurdum -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
