[ Sent to the RFA for libmusicbrainz-2.1 and the RC bug of
libmusicbrainz-2.0, as this relates to both ]

On Thu, Nov 24, 2005 at 12:05:53PM +0100, Florian Ernst wrote:
> On Sun, 18 Sep 2005 14:02:42 +0200, Andreas Rottmann wrote:
> > I'd like someone adopt libmusicbrainz; [...]
> > from my side. Maintainance of libmusicbrainz package is not very 
> > time-consuming, you 
> > should be familiar with C++ though.
> 
> [...]
> I'm just wondering as I might be interested...

FWIW, I packaged the most recent upstream version, following my
personal style, i.e. omitting cdbs. Files are at
<http://people.debian.org/~florian/libmusicbrainz-2.1/>.

Unfortunately there were some problems with the python bindings:
contrary to what the upstream changelog suggests they were not
included in the tarball, but those bindings currently only exist in
CVS. However, they don't give any hint on what their copyright and
redistribution terms might be; in previous releases there was at least
a COPYING file in the python directory, even if no further reference
was given inside the individual files, but now this one is missing,
too. Thus I'm a bit hesitant to just copy them over...

With respect to this new situation I'd prefer to omit the python
bindings completely, despite the pending removal of the bindings as
shipped with libmusicbrainz-2.0. Any thoughts?

Cheers,
Flo

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply via email to