Re: Yet again: Current package status updated

--- On Tue, 10/7/08, Orcan Ogetbil <orcanbahri(a)yahoo.com&gt; wrote: > From: Orcan Ogetbil <orcanbahri(a)yahoo.com&gt; > Subject: Re: Yet again: Current package status updated > To: "RPM Fusion developers discussion list" <rpmfusion-developers(a)lists.rpmfusion.org&gt; > Date: Tuesday, October 7, 2008, 7:13 PM > --- On Tue, 10/7/08, Xavier Lamien > <laxathom(a)fedoraproject.org&gt; wrote: > >> From: Xavier Lamien <laxathom(a)fedoraproject.org&gt; >> Subject: Re: Yet again: Current package status updated >> To: orcanbahri(a)yahoo.com, "RPM Fusion developers > discussion list" > <rpmfusion-developers(a)lists.rpmfusion.org&gt; >> Date: Tuesday, October 7, 2008, 6:56 PM >> On Wed, Oct 8, 2008 at 12:47 AM, Orcan Ogetbil >> <orcanbahri(a)yahoo.com&gt; wrote: >>>> orphaned | KmPg2 | Not found in free-devel >>>> orphaned | KmPg2 | Not found in free-F-8 >>>> orphaned | KmPg2 | Not found in free-F-9 >>>> orphaned | mamory | Not found in free-devel >>>> orphaned | mamory | Not found in free-F-8 >>>> orphaned | mamory | Not found in free-F-9 >>>> orphaned | mupen64 | Not found in free-devel >>>> orphaned | mupen64 | Not found in free-F-8 >>>> orphaned | mupen64 | Not found in free-F-9 >>>> -> Anyone interested? >>>> >>> I can take these over if there's demand. >> If you really want to take them over, please go on > and ask >> for CVS request. >> >> -- >> Xavier.t Lamien >> -- > Interested? Yes for KmPg2 and mupen64. Not that much for > mamory but like I said I'll do it if there is demand. > > Do they need to go through package review process in > bugzilla? Or else, where should the CVS request be filed? > > -oget I understand that the above message of mine might have brought some confusion although I tried to explain my thoughts in a later message. Let me clear up things once and for all. First of all, as of now, I don't own these packages. They are still orphans. 2 of these projects (KmPg2 and mupen64) seem dead to me. No activity for more that 2 years. - We already provide more recent mpeg encoding GUI software (e.g. avidemux) that has more-or-less the same functions. KmPg2 will need patched to work with our ffmpeg. I don't think keeping it is worth the trouble of hacking the code. - I can support mupen64 but it's for i386 only. Thus I can't test the package easily. Also I don't own any software to run on this emulator. - About mamory: I, for one, am just not interest in it. The only problem we will encounter is the mupen64 dependency of mythgame-emulators package, which should be fixable (Don't we have mythgame-emulators for non-i386 systems? How do they work this out?). My own thoughts point in the way that we should consider supporting these 3 packages only if - there is some package that we (will) want to support that depends on some of these 3 packages, or - a packager really wants to keep some of them (that's not me), or - the userbase requests it. Until then -I think- we should put them on the shelf. -oget