Mono-Zeroconf and bundled NDesk.DBus

[David Nielsen]

2009/10/23 Michel Alexandre Salim <michael.silvanus at gmail.com>

> 2009/10/23 David Nielsen <gnomeuser at gmail.com>:
> >
> >
> > 2009/10/23 Michel Alexandre Salim <salimma at fedoraproject.org>
> >>
> >> Hi Aaron,
> >>
> >> Just noticed that Mono-Zeroconf bundles NDesk.DBus (I'm not the Fedora
> >> maintainer for it, and just noticed since due to a glibc bug, we're
> >> having to turn off all but the AvahiDBus transport).
> >>
> >> Since this, unfortunately, is not allowed (without special approval)
> >> in our packages, I'm thinking of updating our system NDesk.DBus to
> >> incorporate your patches. Do you happen to know who maintains
> >> NDesk.DBus right now? The copyright notice is unfortunately totally
> >> out of date (2006!)
> >>
> > Alp Toker is still upstream for ndesk-dbus - I believe there is work
> ongoing
> > on a new release but slowly.
> >
> Yes; bug filed here:
> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ndesk-dbus/+bug/458687
>
> What disturbs me is that there does not appear to be an attempt by
> either Zeroconf and Sugar# to upstream their patches; meanwhile,
> Zeroconf ships with an internal copy (bad!) and Sugar# persuaded
> Fedora, somehow, to change the public interface of NDesk.DBus without
> an API bump.
>
>
When I originally spoke to the sugar guys in relation to their patch they
said that they had submitted patches to upstream, this one was a critical
fix for them with a test case attached, it also withstood testing for a
while without gathering complaints so it felt safe. I judged that allowing
Mono development on Sugar was a worthwhile benefit for the risk such a
change presented especially given it was my understanding the patch was
bound upstream.

I think the issue is an overextended maintainer and a project that
fundamentally works in it's current form.

- David
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/mono/attachments/20091023/5f07a734/attachment.html