Martin Pluskal-2 wrote
On Tue, 2018-01-02 at 03:19 -0700, Luigi Baldoni wrote:
Tomas Chvatal wrote
Luigi Baldoni píše v Út 02. 01. 2018 v 02:55 -0700:
Martin Pluskal-2 wrote
On Tue, 2018-01-02 at 02:36 -0700, Luigi Baldoni wrote: > Indeed I am. Could the mm maintainers come up with an > official > position on the matter?
Which part of "python library is not multimedia app" needs official clarification? What makes position official, three maintainers of mm:app? Five?
Since this seems like a coin toss depending on which maintainer catches the request, it would be nice to have a consistent policy. Also in order to know if the other python packages need to be moved to d:l:py.
It will always be a coin flip. Regardless there always be someone whom would think it is still fitting and some would consider it otherwise.
I would say try to apply common sense, but if it is just library I would say it should not really land there, unless it is a linkpac for something else built from the same source...
To be precise, unofficial (or official but separate) python bindings for a multimedia library.
Should they go to d:l:py and be linked perhaps?
Why would they need to be linked - is something else depending on such python bindings library?
I'll have to check, but in the case of python-python-vlc a separate package has a runtime dependency on it. If so, link would be suitable (with building disabled for factory)
Ceteris paribus, do you recommend them to be moved?
On Tue, 2018-01-02 at 04:39 -0700, Luigi Baldoni wrote: puthon-python-vlc seem to be already readied for submission to d:l:p https://build.opensuse.org/package/show/home:alarrosa:branches:devel:la nguages:python/python-python-vlc M