Packaging HandBrake (was [Bug 679] Review request: HandBrake - Multithreaded DVD to MPEG-4 converter)

[Justin]

On Sun, Nov 15, 2009 at 7:33 PM, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski
<dominik at greysector.net> wrote:
> On Sunday, 15 November 2009 at 23:30, RPM Fusion Bugzilla wrote:
>> http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=679
>> --- Comment #14 from Bernard Johnson <bjohnson at symetrix.com>  2009-11-15 23:30:14 ---
>> (In reply to comment #12)
>> > (In reply to comment #11)
>> > > After a detailed IRC discussion with the authors of HandBrake, it is their wish
>> > > that if HandBrake can not be compiled completely with the bundled libraries
>> > > (all of them), that it not be submitted to the rpmfusion, or any other repo.
>> >
>> > That is very unfriendly of them. Don't they wish to cooperate with downstream
>> > distributors?
>>
>> It seemed to come down to:
>> Lack of control over the changes to libraries they thought were important =
>> increased support requests to their site for "buggy packaging".
>>
>> Even if we were able to get all patches upstreamed, they insisted that we
>> should be bundling the libraries so that nobody can make updates or patches
>> that break HandBrake.  Personally, I think this is paranoid, as we know that
>> when ABIs are respected, it's not likely random breakage will happen.
>
> I agree here. That's too paranoid. If a libary update breaks something, it's
> a bug in the library or in the way that apps use it. Either way, that should
> be fixed. And, as you say, ABI checks should catch most of the cases.
>
>>  However,
>> the recent updates to gtk2 broke the stable 0.9.3 version (their Ubuntu build
>> and my test build), which was cited as an example.  I know that things like
>> this are extremely rare though.
>>
>> Although they have release versions, I don't know if I'd go so far as to call
>> them "stable" since many times the bug reporters are asked to upgrade to trunk
>> and then retry the bug.
>
> So, in terms of supporting only the latest trunk, that's similar to what
> MPlayer and FFmpeg do. I don't see much complaints about streams of Fedora
> users complaining directly to the developers. We can keep pushing the latest
> trunk to rawhide, but once we have a release, we often can't make a major
> update easily. I guess HB developers are having a hard time understanding
> that they cannot control which version of their software people will want
> to use.
>
>> > Actually you could still do it without their approval. After all, the licence
>> > allows you to do that.
>>
>> Yes, I know, but it would still cause a burden for them.  Also things like
>> Help->Guide direct to their wiki page for help.  This page does/will contain
>> *current* version information, not necessarily the version in repositories.
>> This would be a problem for both us and them.
>>
>> If I was able to completely decouple from the upstream support, I would look
>> into it again.
>
> Adding a repo tag to the version string displayed by HandBrake would give
> enough indication that it's not a vanilla version. It's what we do with
> MPlayer and FFmpeg as well. If upstream wants to deny support to users of
> our packages, it's their right to do so.
>
>> > So did they just send patches upstream or did they actually work with upstream
>> > to have them applied to upstream source trees?
>>
>> I don't know, I suspect a little of both. My understanding is that at least one
>> upstream has not changed in years - that makes it hard to get patches in :)
>
> Well, we could look at these patches and see if they're worth incorporating
> into RPMFusion packages if upstreams are really dead. However, if upstream
> has rejected the patch or if HandBrake developers haven't done their due
> diligence in getting their patches accepted upstream, then maybe the patches
> aren't so essential after all.
>
> Regards,
> R.
>
> --
> Fedora http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Rathann
> RPMFusion http://rpmfusion.org | MPlayer http://mplayerhq.hu
> "Faith manages."
>        -- Delenn to Lennier in Babylon 5:"Confessions and Lamentations"
>

http://handbrake.fr/irclogs/handbrake/handbrake20091115_pg2.html
(starts at the bottom)

Honestly, their attitude towards 0x100 and, calling people retarded
(page 5 and probably other places) among other insults, and the fact
that a main developer actually used the term "luser" (page 5) tell me
that we need not be concerned about them.

Whatever course we decide regarding the libraries, I think it should
be packaged without consideration for their feelings. I'm all for
having a good relationship with upstream... but wow.

Just my 2c

P.S. - 0x100 was way nicer and held out waaaay longer than I could have.