[Pkg-blender-maintainers] Random thoughts/todos about blender in debian

[Florian Ernst]

Hi all,

On Wed, Apr 11, 2007 at 03:19:45AM +0200, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
> Cyril Brulebois <cyril.brulebois at enst-bretagne.fr> (05/04/2007):
> >  + still the copyright issue, which is AFAIR what prevented us to
> >    upload 2.43 into experimental. Having updated it to the latest
> >    GPL/BL, it is already an improvement, though, so maybe we could
> >    just try? I don't know how much information might be missing.
> >    Wouter, any input?
> I still need some input. BTW, given the reported crashes in launchpad as
> well as reported on IRC, I feel that experimental might be a good idea
> until a possible 2.43a release.

Hmm, that depends. When uploading to unstable we get a larger user base
and thus blender will get tested more thoroughly at the cost of a more
bumpy ride for some (unstable) users. Provided all issues, if any, will
be communicated upstream this might help getting a better 2.43a.
As Etch has just been released, now is quite a godd time for any bumpy
rides outside of expiremental. :)

Regarding the copyright issue, to me it looks reasonably covered as of
2.42a-6, but I'd love to hear some input from Wouter on this.

> >  + push some of our patches upstream (e.g. manpage, kfreebsd, gcc4.3)
> >     => If someone already having had contact with upstream wants to
> >        take care of it, just do it; otherwise I'll do that in some
> >        time.
> Still to be done, (n+1)th target for me.

That's great. I'm afraid I won't be available that much myself, again,
so this is much appreciated.

> >  + solve the desktop/menu integration thing (#417901)
> >     => I'll be working on it soon, maybe tonight.
> Done.

Wonderful, thanks!

> >  + check whether the genpot thingy is still needed. It takes *ages* on
> >    some machines (e.g. several dozen of minutes on jcristau's Ultra
> >    5), and I guess it would be cool to sort this stuff out. If it's no
> >    longer needed, dropping it would be cool to (auto)builders and
> >    testers; and if it's still, notifying upstream or asking him for
> >    the status of this would be cool.
> My next target.

JFTR, this stuff was taken from Ubuntu in 2.42a-2. Given that Lukas
Fittl just approached the list he might give some input on this as well.

> >  + maybe move from cvs to svn for the packaging (I guess that everyone
> >    knows about cvs VS svn things, just wanted to know if we stick to cvs
> >    for historical reasons or for personal tastes or something like
> >    that).
> Nobody cares? I guess that status quo prevails, then.

Well, for our purposes CVS seems to just work. Is changing to a
different system really worth the effort? It's not that I'm opposed to a
change, but I wouldn't like to change just for the sake of it.
BTW, on debian-www there's a discussion about such a change, too, which
mentions quite a few good points, even though we don't share many of the
problems.

> >  + write the last changes to $VCS once we've decided upon the chosen
> >    one.
> Done, with 2.42a-{6,7}, but w/o the (aborted) etch1 upload.

Poor etch1, obsoleted via unstable, may it rest in peace. ;)


Wouter, Antonio, anyone, are you out there? What's your position on
this?

Cheers,
Flo
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
Url : http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-blender-maintainers/attachments/20070413/31089655/attachment.pgp