pulseaudio maintainership status

[Brendan Jones]

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.