pulseaudio maintainership status

[Peter Robinson]

On Sat, Dec 29, 2012 at 4:23 PM, Brendan Jones
<brendan.jones.it at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 12/28/2012 08:25 PM, Peter Robinson wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Dec 28, 2012 at 3:34 PM, Brendan Jones
>> <brendan.jones.it at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 12/28/2012 12:33 AM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Steve Clark wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Then why is no one fixing the identified bugs?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Because Lennart insists on backporting only individual fixes to Fedora
>>>> releases as opposed to rebasing to a new version, and nobody has the
>>>> time
>>>> to
>>>> identify and backport the relevant commits.
>>>>
>>>> IMHO, we should just upgrade PulseAudio to the latest version in an
>>>> update.
>>>>
>>>>           Kevin Kofler
>>>>
>>> I fully agree. The effort it takes too identify fixes is too large. Also,
>>> upstream will not be as amenable in helping us diagnose bugs when we are
>>> so
>>> behind.
>>
>>
>> I don't agree. We're moments from release and the 3.0 release hasn't
>> been out for that long and it's likely that while it might fix the one
>> bug it could introduce any number of other bugs.
>>
>>> I know upstream is moving really fast these days, but I thinbk any risk
>>> is
>>> alleviated by Rex's backport - we can safely identify any showstoppers
>>> within a fedora release cycle.
>>
>>
>> There's a working backport patch for a platform that isn't really
>> supported in Fedora and it works on other virtual platforms without
>> issue. While I would love to see 3.0 in Fedora 18 due to it's support
>> for UCM which is used extensively in ARM I'm not even pushing it
>> because I know it could break more than it might well fix.
>>
>>> 1.1 for F17 is way to far behind IMHO given that upstream is now at 3.0.
>>
>>
>> Why? it works and is relatively stable, there's a lot of change
>> between 1.1, 2.0, 2.1 and 3.0 which could introduce any number of
>> other bugs and regressions in a release that is suppose to be stable.
>
>
> Why? Upstream is now really active - insisting that they support software 2
> major releases old is a bit much.
> If enough people are using rawhide and/or Rex's backport we should be able
> to keep close to upstream without risk. I think restricting ourselves to
> upstream major releases within the Fedora release cycle _becomes_ risky when
> we are so behind.

The term "If" is the problem. How many people are using rawhide, I
know I am but not really with sound, I'm not against it but I also
don't see the point in upgrading just for the sake of it.

Peter