http://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=523296 User vuntz@novell.com added comment http://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=523296#c32 Vincent Untz <vuntz@novell.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEEDINFO |REOPENED Info Provider|vuntz@novell.com | --- Comment #32 from Vincent Untz <vuntz@novell.com> 2009-08-19 04:44:40 MDT --- (In reply to comment #30)
I don't think separating ekiga from libpt / opal is a very good approach. You can't touch one of the packages with the other two.
Agree: libpt/opal/ekiga are generally released at the same time. (In reply to comment #31)
how about you get ekiga maintainer in n:t then? :)
I would say that maintainership of libpt/opal/ekiga should go to the same people. And given the fact that it was, hrm, not really moving before the GNOME team took over, I guess the GNOME team has to keep it unless some other people step up. Now, as to moving stuff to n:t again... The main reason to go back to G:F was a tool issue: if the GNOME team maintains those packages, then it's easier if it works with our tools. And osc gnome was not able to track n:t. Now, it's able to track n:t, but we still miss a feature to stay you want to track those packages in n:t, and not the whole n:t. So. My conclusion: if you move it back to n:t, then please find other maintainers first because you can be sure we'll ignore the packages in n:t for now. Else, please wait until we fix our tools :-) (and it's going to happen, it's actually nearly there). Feel free to disagree with my conclusion, of course. -- Configure bugmail: http://bugzilla.novell.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.