[Fedora-packaging] Darktable and Rawspeed

Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski dominik at greysector.net
Fri Jul 10 16:24:58 UTC 2015


On Friday, 10 July 2015 at 17:56, Sérgio Basto wrote:
> On Sex, 2015-07-10 at 12:48 +0200, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski wrote:
> > On Friday, 10 July 2015 at 09:35, Germano Massullo wrote:
> > > Hi, I am Caterpillar, yesterday we were speaking about Darktable and
> > > Rawspeed on Freenode.
> > > I have a question: if Darktable's Rawspeed fork will be accepted to be
> > > included in Fedora's repos, would it be possible to call it
> > > "darktable-rawspeed" to distinguish and divide it from upstream Rawspeed?
> > 
> > Well, ideally there should be just one canonical version of Rawspeed and
> > it should come from the canonical upstream. Using a fork is allowed if
> > original upstream is dead or unresponsive to bug reports, if it's
> > compatible and if other projects have switched to it as well.
> FYI rawstudio bundles rawspeed , because rawspeed isn't available on
> Fedora , but upstream of rawspeed is not dead [1] 
> One of my goals was update rawspeed [2] on rawstudio , maybe the best
> was packaging rawspeed or a fork I don't know . I can help on a package
> review ...
> [1] https://github.com/klauspost/rawspeed
> [2] https://github.com/rawstudio/rawstudio/issues/5

So, we have two consumers of rawspeed: rawstudio and darktable. It's
pretty clear that rawspeed must be unbundled, then, and from both.
Rawspeed upstream says that darktable's fork contributes back regularly
and the only change is disabling support for certain cameras not
supported by darktable. I wonder why this is a problem for darktable.

Germano, could you ask darktable developers what the changes are between
their fork and canonical rawspeed upstream? Please also produce a diff
and post it somewhere.

> > I have provided some comments in your issue report on rawspeed's github:
> > https://github.com/klauspost/rawspeed/issues/109

Judging by last comment, upstream is receptive to the idea of at least
adding an option to build rawspeed as a library (i.e. patches welcome).

> > Could you please do the same in your report on darktable's redmine? I
> > don't have an account there.
> > http://redmine.darktable.org/issues/10582

If darktable's rawspeed fork is ahead of rawspeed proper then one option
would be to refrain from updating until their patches are accepted by
rawspeed upstream.

Fedora http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Rathann
RPMFusion http://rpmfusion.org
"Faith manages."
        -- Delenn to Lennier in Babylon 5:"Confessions and Lamentations"

More information about the packaging mailing list