Re: Ardour 2.
Hi Luke, (I'm cc-ing the other maintainers of the ardour package and the debian-multimedia list as well) |--== Luke Yelavich writes: LY Hi LY I am a member of the UbuntuStudio team, and helping with ardour 2 LY packaging. As previously discussed, upstream would prefer if ardour, and LY ardour2 were separate packages. I have since done this, and have just LY packaged ardour2.0, rc1. If you would like to use my work as a base for LY Debian, you can find the source package here: LY http://www.themuso.id.au/ubuntu/ardour2. LY Looking forward to future collaboration with Debian on this package, and LY from hearing from you soon. Thanks! I think it's a good base to start on, however I'm thinking to make a couple of cosmetic changes: - Drop the ardour2-session-exchange (which consists of only one file) and ardour2-doc (very few text files as well) packages and merge them with the actual binary packages [0], this makes things simpler. - Keep the package source name as ardour instead of changing it to ardour2, as the upstream tarball is named ardour-X.Y - Name the binary packages simply ardour, ardour-i686 and ardour-altivec, this will keep the possibility of a parallel install of the old ardour-gtk package, and at the same time if you type apt-get install ardour you get ardour 2.0 installed, which is what I intuitively expect to happen. Ciao, Free [0] Note that the ardour manual is currently not included in ardour-doc, nor in the original upstream tarball. If later on we want to package it as well, it would be probably better to make a separate source package, as they do for example with the eximdoc4 package. This give us the possibility to upload the two things separately, without having to rebuild ardour for X archs just to incorporate some new additions in the manual, or to upload the whole manual at every ardour upload. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Ardour 2.
On Fri, Apr 13, 2007 at 07:40:29PM EST, Free Ekanayaka wrote: Hi Luke, (I'm cc-ing the other maintainers of the ardour package and the debian-multimedia list as well) No problem. Thanks! I think it's a good base to start on, however I'm thinking to make a couple of cosmetic changes: - Drop the ardour2-session-exchange (which consists of only one file) and ardour2-doc (very few text files as well) packages and merge them with the actual binary packages [0], this makes things simpler. Makes sense. - Keep the package source name as ardour instead of changing it to ardour2, as the upstream tarball is named ardour-X.Y Yep. - Name the binary packages simply ardour, ardour-i686 and ardour-altivec, this will keep the possibility of a parallel install of the old ardour-gtk package, and at the same time if you type apt-get install ardour you get ardour 2.0 installed, which is what I intuitively expect to happen. I am going to go ahead and make these changes now, as UbuntuStudio want to ship ardour2 on the CD they are preparing, and while not in Ubuntu proper, I'd rather we get it right the first time. I'll let you know once I have done so, and will point you to the source package. Thanks for your response. -- Luke Yelavich GPG key: 0xD06320CE (http://www.themuso.com/themuso-gpg-key.txt) Email MSN: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED] signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Ardour 2.
On Fri, Apr 13, 2007 at 08:58:38PM EST, Luke Yelavich wrote: I am going to go ahead and make these changes now, as UbuntuStudio want to ship ardour2 on the CD they are preparing, and while not in Ubuntu proper, I'd rather we get it right the first time. I'll let you know once I have done so, and will point you to the source package. The source package can be found here: http://www.themuso.id.au/ubuntu/ardour2. -- Luke Yelavich GPG key: 0xD06320CE (http://www.themuso.com/themuso-gpg-key.txt) Email MSN: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED] signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Ardour 2.
Hi Luke, |--== Luke Yelavich writes: LY On Fri, Apr 13, 2007 at 08:58:38PM EST, Luke Yelavich wrote: I am going to go ahead and make these changes now, as UbuntuStudio want to ship ardour2 on the CD they are preparing, and while not in Ubuntu proper, I'd rather we get it right the first time. I'll let you know once I have done so, and will point you to the source package. LY The source package can be found here: LY http://www.themuso.id.au/ubuntu/ardour2. That's great! Thanks, I'll have a closer look tomorrow. Just another tip, if it's not to late. I'd change the version number from: 2.0rc1-0ubuntu1 to 2.0~rc1-0ubuntu1 This way if you later package the final 2.0-0ubuntu1, apt will be happy to upgrade it. [0] Ciao! Free [0] apt considers 2.0 2.0rc1, BUT 2.0 2.0~rc1 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
