Hi all,
2017-03-22 0:22 GMT-05:00 Lars Kruse <[email protected]>:
>
> Hi,
>
>
> Am Tue, 21 Mar 2017 22:09:22 -0600
> schrieb Mark E <[email protected]>:
>
> > When you create the new version maybe nudge whoever to update their
distro
> > packages. I can tell you Ubuntu and Deb packages are so far out of date
> > they're totally useless, and even pointless.
>
> our local radio is a happy user of the Liquidsoap version packaged within
Debian
> Jessie. Thus I need to insist, that these packages are indeed useful (at
least
> for us).
>
>
> > Most people do not understand compiling, and of those that do many are
> > oblivious to opam (nothing like regular packages), people tend to rely
on
> > apt-get or yum. If you want wider use that's the way to go - ready-made
> > packages that just work.
>
> I fully support this assessment.
> At least here we will stick with the version packaged within Debian as
long as
> it is technically feasible. For now I do not see problems in this regard.
>
> But since Romain was previously the maintainer of the Debian package
(thank you
> for that!), I guess that he is well aware of the importance of available
> Liquidsoap packaging for distributions.
> The lack of up-to-date packages (e.g. within Debian) can obviously only
be fixed
> by someone dedicating his/her time for the packaging.
Thanks for noticing that!
I was, indeed, packaging liquidsoap for Debian, with Sam, for years and I
totally understand that for people who have a solid knowledge of their own
package manager, being able to simply call apt-get install liquidsoap is
great.
However, packaging takes up a lot of time and is very
distribution-specific. As times passed, we had to decide where we want to
focus the only available time that we have and, frankly, I'd rather spend
it developing new features and fixing bugs in liquidsoap itself.
Furthermore, the level of complexity of the Debian OCaml packages, with
virtual dependencies used to track ABI changes and a gazillion of plugins
to accommodate the various optional features of liquidsoap is also an issue.
As such, opam seems like a great trade-off. We can package our software for
a wide array of distributions in a single effort while it takes care of
external dependencies and can rebuild liquidsoap with for each optional
feature that our user might want to enable.
That being said, I am available to mentor anybody who is willing to update
the current Debian packages. I don't think it would be too much work
per-say, update source tarball, dependencies and plugin packages, mostly.
If there is such a need for it, one might hope that there might be someone
willing to step in and help.. ;-)
Nevertheless, thanks guys for your interest in liquidsoap!
Romain
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Savonet-users mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/savonet-users
