Music apps for Fedora 6

[Anthony Green]

We're coming up to FC6 test 2.  It's nice the basic infrastructure is
getting into FE, like dssi and jack-audio-connection-kit, but what would
be really cool is if some non-trivial apps like ardour, rosegarden and
hydrogen could get accepted into FE prior to the FC6 release.  They have
all been submitted to Extras by myself and others, but I don't know how
to make the review process go any faster.  Suggestions?

AG

[Thorsten Leemhuis]

Anthony Green schrieb:
>  We're coming up to FC6 test 2.  It's nice the basic
> infrastructure is
>  getting into FE, like dssi and jack-audio-connection-kit, but what would
>  be really cool is if some non-trivial apps like ardour, rosegarden and
>  hydrogen could get accepted into FE prior to the FC6 release.  They have
>  all been submitted to Extras by myself and others, but I don't know how
>  to make the review process go any faster.  Suggestions? 
Well, you said "been submitted to Extras by myself and others". The
solution is quite simple afaics: those "others" review your packages and
you review their packages. Or am I missing something here?

Sorry, I know there are a lot of packages in the QA queue. But without
QA it would be a great mess :-/

CU
thl

[Jan Depner]

On Sun, 2006-07-09 at 19:46 +0200, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
>  
>  Anthony Green schrieb:
>  > We're coming up to FC6 test 2.  It's nice the basic infrastructure is
>  > getting into FE, like dssi and jack-audio-connection-kit, but what would
>  > be really cool is if some non-trivial apps like ardour, rosegarden and
>  > hydrogen could get accepted into FE prior to the FC6 release.  They have
>  > all been submitted to Extras by myself and others, but I don't know how
>  > to make the review process go any faster.  Suggestions?
>   
    I may be mistaken but I was under the impression that Paul Davis
didn't really want Ardour released in distributions just yet.

    On the other hand, if someone wants to slap JAMin in there I
certainly wouldn't mind ;-)

>  Well, you said "been submitted to Extras by myself and
> others". The
>  solution is quite simple afaics: those "others" review your packages and
>  you review their packages. Or am I missing something here?
>  
>  Sorry, I know there are a lot of packages in the QA queue. But without
>  QA it would be a great mess :-/
>   
    Amen.



-- 
Jan 'Evil Twin' Depner
The Fuzzy Dice
http://myweb.cableone.net/eviltwin69/fuzzy.html


"As we enjoy great advantages from the invention of others, we should be 
glad of an opportunity to serve others by any invention of ours, and 
this we should do freely and generously."

Benjamin Franklin, on declining patents offered by the governor of 
Pennsylvania for his "Pennsylvania Fireplace", c. 1744

[Anthony Green]

On Sun, 2006-07-09 at 14:54 -0500, Jan Depner wrote:
>      I may be mistaken but I was under the impression that Paul Davis
>  didn't really want Ardour released in distributions just yet. 
The Ardour web site says:
"In the future, we may offer binary releases of Ardour directly from
ardour.org. These will be distribution neutral, in the same way that
Firefox and Thunderbird are. At the present time, we are relying on the
excellent work done by the package maintainers for various
distributions."

Maybe you mean Ardour 2, which may not be ready for prime time yet.

AG

[Anthony Green]

On Sun, 2006-07-09 at 19:46 +0200, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
>  Well, you said "been submitted to Extras by myself and
> others". The
>  solution is quite simple afaics: those "others" review your packages and
>  you review their packages. Or am I missing something here? 
Maybe it's me who is missing something.  I didn't realize that any
sponsored committer could review and approve packages.  If so, then I'll
start reviewing today.

AG

[Thorsten Leemhuis]

Am Sonntag, den 09.07.2006, 13:38 -0700 schrieb Anthony Green:
>  On Sun, 2006-07-09 at 19:46 +0200, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
>  > Well, you said "been submitted to Extras by myself and others". The
>  > solution is quite simple afaics: those "others" review your packages and
>  > you review their packages. Or am I missing something here?
>  
>  Maybe it's me who is missing something.  I didn't realize that any
>  sponsored committer could review and approve packages. 
They can as long is the new package is created by someone that is also
sponsored already. In other words: Only reviews from first-time
contributors need to be done by sponsors, all other reviews can be
approved from all sponsored extras contributors.

>    If so, then I'll start reviewing today. 
Have fun. But could you do me a favor and add above information to the
wiki somewhere where you would have expected it? This might avoid that
other run into the same misunderstanding later. tia!

CU
thl