Hm... Really, one of the elderly should step in here. In their absence:

Basically, the root problem seem to be that  the cmplayer dev hasn't really
tried to push his patches to the mpv upstream. Looking at how vital the
development at mpv [1] is, this looks like a mistake to me.

However, this is the cmplayers's devs decision. Question is how rpmfusion
should handle this. To me, merging the two versions (if at all possible) is
probably not a reasonable task for a packager - it's just looks too much
(?)

>From a more formal  POV: are these changes big enough to warrant an
exception?  . A complete diff between the two versions, if only just to see
how big it actually is,  might be helpful here - the git history is not
that easy to read.

--alec


[1] https://github.com/mpv-player/mpv/


On Sat, Jan 25, 2014 at 11:33 AM, Ben Reedy <[email protected]> wrote:

> On 16/01/14 21:14, Ben Reedy wrote:
>
>> Sorry Miro, I forgot to add that.
>>
>> >Has the library behaviour been modified?
>> The MPV back end to be bundled with CMPlayer has been patched for use
>> with CMPlayer.
>> For those interested, the changes made to the bundled MPV can be viewed
>> at Github [1]
>>
>> >Why haven't the changes been pushed to the upstream library?
>> The developer for CMPlayer has stated that these patches are specific to
>> CMPlayer, and are incompatible with upstream.
>>
>> >Could we make the forked version the canonical version within Fedora?
>> Same answer as above: the CMPlayer patches are incompatible with upstream
>> and are specific to CMPlayer.
>>
>> >Are the changes useful to consumers other than the bundling application?
>> No, these changes would only benefit CMPlayer users.
>>
>> >Is upstream keeping the base library updated or are they continuously
>> one or more versions behind the latest upstream release?
>> The CMPlayer developer is regularly merging upstream MPV commits into his
>> fork.
>>
>> >What is the attitude of upstream towards bundling?
>> The CMPlayer developer has stated that the bundling of MPV is necessary
>> for CMPlayer to successfully build and run.
>>
>> >Does the maintainer of the Fedora package of the library being bundled
>> have any comments about this?
>> The maintainer of the MPV package, Miro Hrončok, suggested this bundling
>> exception.
>>
>> >Is there a plan for unbundling the library at a later time?
>> Not currently.
>>
>> Attached is an email reply from upstream concerning the bundling of MPV
>> with CMPlayer.
>>
>> [1] https://github.com/xylosper/mpv/compare/mpv-player:master...master
>>
>
> Hi all, would anyone like to comment on this bundling exception?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Ben.
>

Reply via email to