Bug#419890: include aoTuV patch

[Rogério Brito]

Hi there, Adeodato.

On Jul 07 2007, Adeodato Simó wrote:
> * Rogério Brito [Sat, 07 Jul 2007 07:00:56 -0300]:
> > I have already packaged a private version of libvorbis with the aotuv
> > patch (which applies cleanly) and I also fixed some lintian warnings.
> 
> > If some mentors are interested in what I did so far, I put the sources
> > on my homepage:
> 
> > http://www.ime.usp.br/~rbrito/libvorbis/libvorbis_1.1.2.dfsg-2.0+aotuv5.dsc
> 
> > Please, note that they are almost in a point to be uploaded to, say,
> > experimental, but there are some cosmetic documentation facts that need
> > some more attention (any comments are *QUITE* welcome).
> 
> I can't believe you're looking for a sponsor for an NMU of these
> characteristics, even if targetted at experimental (but the changelog
> entry says 'unstable', btw).

Well, I'm not exactly looking for a sponsor. I am more interested in
packaging comments than anything else. The fact that I mentioned that it
could be uploaded to experimental, despite the changelog saying that it
was targeted at unstable is simply another thing that I left to be
corrected by people more experienced than me.

Besides that, what do you mean with "these characteristics"? That it is
an "intrusive" patch?

I would really appreciate the inclusion of such package into debian. If
not, then I think that other possibilities would be approachable.

> You don't, ever, do things like that, particularly not before mailing
> the bug report asking what the status of the bug is, whether the
> maintainer has an opinion on it, and expressing your wish to see the
> patch applied in an experimental version.

Ok, sorry for that. I was, as you mentioned moved by enthusiasm and got
some packaging done. I should, indeed, have contacted the maintainers.
OTOH, the fact that the bug was simple to solve and the time that has
passed for something this exciting made me do it.

I stand corrected and wouldn't mind if we switched this discussion to
the BTS or privately (even though I still want to improve my packaging
skills).

> We all appreciate enthusiasm and work put onto improving Debian, yours
> in this case, but sometimes enthusiasm can, by ignorance or else, go off
> the correct path, and this is not desirable. Consider this a friendly
> note pointing out that what you're trying to do here is not quite
> correct.

Thank you very much. It was done with the best of the intentions, indeed.

> Said that, and now with my libvorbis maintainer hat on, feel free to
> mail the bug report again as hinted above, and we can discuss things.

Nice!

> Other options besides uploading to experimental would be uploading the
> patch in a separate source package, or create a separate binary package
> with the patch from the libvorbis source package, given that the ABI is
> maintained.

Great. I would really like to see one of these other options implemented.

> Just for the record, these two were fixed in the Bazaar branch a week ago:
> 
>   http://bzr.debian.org/pkg-xiph/libvorbis

I get a blank page with just a link to the parent package.


Thanks, Rogério Brito.

-- 
Rogério Brito : rbrito at ime.usp.br : http://www.ime.usp.br/~rbrito
Homepage of the algorithms package : http://algorithms.berlios.de
Homepage on freshmeat:  http://freshmeat.net/projects/algorithms/