[Fedora-packaging] Darktable and Rawspeed

Germano Massullo germano.massullo at gmail.com
Fri Jul 10 19:43:42 UTC 2015

Il 10/07/2015 18:24, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski ha scritto:
>>> 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.
> Regards,
> Dominik
A little piece of #darktable Freenode channel chat of yesterday,
concerning the proposal of Fedora shipping Rawspeed as static library


[20:59] <houz> Germano: there are 2 cases that can go wrong:
[20:59] <houz> 1) fedora ships a copy of rawspeed that is older than
what we expect. the result is missing camera support compared to our
release notes
[20:59] <pmjdebruijn> which is bound to happen, since upstream rawspeed
usually lags significant behind compared to ours
[21:00] <houz> 2) fedora ships a newer version of rawspeed than what we
expect. in that case rawspeed will allow loading raw formats that dt
doesn't expect and misses support for
[21:00] <pmjdebruijn> leading to potentially broken history stacks
[21:00] <pmjdebruijn> which will impact user data essentially
[21:00] <houz> and yes, there is 3) our copy of rawspeed is more a fork
that gets synced back and forth than just a copy. actual work is done in
our copy
[21:22] <Germano> I am sure somebody will say: "uh can't they just
submit their Rawspeed changes to upstream and then wait for an upstream
version being released and use it?"
[21:23] <houz> yes, we could. and stop releasing every 2 months or so

More information about the packaging mailing list