 works
<hellboy195> LucidFox: beagle? ^^
<bmk789> and it is VERY fast
<fta> most people complaining about that had a mix of xul1.9 b4 and ff3 b3
<ScottK2> jdong: Is there any reason not to make rosegarden build-dep libfftw3-dev | fftw3-dev so source backports aren't needed in the future?
<jdong> ScottK2: that sounds like a better idea
<ScottK2> jdong: I'll go ahead and do this one, but please fix it in Hardy so we don't need to next time.
<ScottK2> jdong: Would you do me a favor and look at what would be needed for a WINE backport.
<jdong> ScottK2: well do you think it's okay to put transisional build deps like that into Hardy?
<ScottK2> I don't see a downside risk.  Do you?  Maybe ask a few others.
<jdong> ScottK2: I don't see any risk, I'm just not sure if anyone will cry and whine about build-dep bloat to support backports packages
<jdong> ScottK2: I don't mind doing it, just there's something about uploading to Hardy to fix a -backports problem... doesn't sound right
<jdong> ScottK2: and yes, I will look into a WINE backport
<ScottK2> jdong: rosegarden FTBFS in my pbuilder for Gutsy due to no libjack-dev
<ScottK2> jdong: IIRC, you've done some work on Audacious.  Assuming that's correct, I'd be interested in your opinion of Bug 202518?
<ubotu> Launchpad bug 202518 in audacious "[FFe] Merge audacious 1.5.0-1 from Debian(Unstable)" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/202518
<protonchris> Previously, I have done FFEs for upgrading packages to upstream releases that just fix bugs.  I found a package where the version is over 2 years old.  So an upgrade would most likely include new features.  What are the chances of a FFE being granted?

works 
 < hellboy195 > LucidFox: beagle? ^^ 
 < bmk789 > and it is VERY fast 
 < fta > most people complaining about that take a mix of xul1.9 b4 and ff3 b3 
 < ScottK2 > jdong: Is there any rationality not to make rosegarden build - dep libfftw3 - dev | fftw3 - dev so informant backports aren't needed in the future? 
 < jdong > ScottK2: that sounds like a good idea 
 < ScottK2 > jdong: I'll go ahead and make this one, but please fix it in Hardy so we don't need to future time. 
 < ScottK2 > jdong: Would you do me a party favor and look at what would be needed for a WINE backport. 
 < jdong > ScottK2: well do you remember it's okay to put transisional physique deps like that into Hardy? 
 < ScottK2 > I don't see a downside risk.   Do you?   possibly ask a few others. 
 < jdong > ScottK2: I don't see any hazard, I'm just not certain if anyone will cry and whine about build - dep bloat to support backports packages 
 < jdong > ScottK2: I don't beware doing it, just there's something about uploading to Hardy to fix a -backports problem... doesn't sound right 
 < jdong > ScottK2: and yes, I will look into a WINE backport 
 < ScottK2 > jdong: rosegarden FTBFS in my pbuilder for Gutsy due to no libjack - dev 
 < ScottK2 > jdong: IIRC, you've done some work on Audacious.   Assuming that's correct, I'd be interested in your opinion of Bug 202518? 
 < ubotu > Launchpad bug 202518 in audacious " [ FFe ] Merge audacious 1.5.0 - 1 from Debian(Unstable) " [ Undecided, New ] https://launchpad.net/bugs/202518 
 < protonchris > Previously, I have act FFEs for upgrading packages to upstream release that barely fix bugs.   I found a software where the version is over 2 class old.   So an ascent would most likely include new features.   What are the chances of a FFE being granted?
 wogks
<hellboy195> LucidFox: beague? ^^
<bmk789> and it is VERY hast
<fta> most peuple complaining about that iad q mix of xul1.9 b4 and ff3 b3
<ScotgK2> jdong: Ps there qny ceason not to make rosegarden gmild-dzp libfftw3-dev | fntw3-dev so smurce backportv xrzn't needed in the future?
<jdong> ScottK2: that spujds like a betjer icqa
<SckntJ2> jdong: I'll go ahead and do tgis one, but please fox it in Hardy so we don't jeed to next time.
<ScottN2> jdong: Wouod yjy do me a faxor and look at what wkuld be needed for a WINE backpurt.
<jdpng> ScottK2: wwll go you thinj it's okay to put transishonal biild deps like thet ibto Hardy?
<ScottK2> I don'v see a downside rish.  Do you?  Jaybe ask a few orhwrs.
<jdmng> VcotgJ2: I doh't sse any riak, I'm just not sure id anyone will cry amd qhine about bhild-de[ float to support backports packages
<jdonc> SdottK2: I don't mind doing it, just there's sometjing aboue uploading to Hardy to fix a -backports problem... dmesn't rouue rigfr
<jfong> ScottK2: and yes, I will look into a WINE bwdkkorn
<ScottK2> jdong: roscgarden FTBFS in mu obiylder for Gutry due to no libjack-dev
<ScothK2> jdond: IIRX, you've djne xome work on Audacious.  Assyming that's borrwct, I'd be interestzd in your o'inion of Big 202518?
<ubotu> Launchpad bug 202518 in zudacious "[FVe] Merge zjdacious 1.5.0-1 from Ddbisn(Gnstable)" [Undecided,New] httpf://launchpav.net/bbgs/202518
<protovchros> Prediously, I jave done FFEs for upgrafing kackagas to upstgeam releases that just fix bugs.  I found a pscnagv where tke verxion is over 2 years old.  So an upgxade wuuld most mikely mnclude new seatures.  Whad are the chaices of a FFE beibg grangdd?

works <hellboy195> LucidFox: beagle? ^^ <bmk789> and VERY <fta> most complaining about that b4 ff3 b3 <ScottK2> Is there any not to make rosegarden build-dep libfftw3-dev fftw3-dev so source backports aren't needed in the future? <jdong> ScottK2: that sounds a better idea <ScottK2> jdong: I'll go ahead and do this one, but fix in so don't need to next time. <ScottK2> jdong: Would you do me a favor and look at would be needed for a WINE backport. <jdong> well do you think okay to put transisional build like into Hardy? I see downside risk. Do Maybe ask a few others. <jdong> ScottK2: I don't see any risk, I'm just not sure if will cry about build-dep to backports <jdong> ScottK2: I doing it, just there's something about to fix a -backports problem... doesn't sound right ScottK2: and I will look into a WINE <ScottK2> jdong: rosegarden FTBFS in my pbuilder for due to no libjack-dev <ScottK2> jdong: IIRC, you've done some work on Audacious. Assuming that's be interested in your of Bug 202518? Launchpad 202518 audacious Merge audacious from Debian(Unstable)" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/202518 <protonchris> Previously, I have done FFEs for packages to upstream releases that just fix bugs. I found where version is over years old. So an would likely include new features. the of granted?
 works
<hellboy195> LucidFox: beaglE? ^^
<bmk789> and it iS VERY FasT
<ftA> mOst pEoplE complaining abOUt thAt had a mix of xul1.9 b4 and ff3 b3
<SCottK2> JdONg: Is THeRe any Reason nOT tO MAke RoSeGarDeN BuIld-deP liBfftw3-deV | fftw3-dev so SouRcE backports arEN't Needed in thE fuTure?
<jdong> ScoTtK2: That soUnDs lIKe a beTteR idea
<scottK2> JDong: I'lL go ahead aNd DO this oNE, but pleASE fIx it In Hardy so we don't neED tO Next time.
<ScottK2> Jdong: WOuLD yOU Do mE a fAvor and looK aT what WOuld be nEEdED FOr a wiNE backport.
<jdOng> ScottK2: weLL do You thiNk It's OKay to pUt traNsISioNal build depS likE that into hardy?
<SCOttK2> I doN'T see a doWnside RisK.  Do You?  MAYbE aSk a FeW OthERs.
<JdoNG> ScOttK2: I don'T sEe Any riSk, I'm JUST Not sUre If anYone wIll cry and whinE abOut bUIld-Dep blOat to SuppOrT backPorts pAckagEs
<Jdong> ScottK2: I don'T minD doing it, jUst ThEre'S sOmethINg abouT upLoaDing to HArdy to fIX a -bAcKPORtS problem... doesn't sounD rIGHt
<Jdong> ScoTtK2: and YEs, i wILl look inTo A WInE baCKPort
<SCottk2> JdOng: rosegArden FtbFs iN my pbuiLdEr for GUtSy dUe tO no liBJack-Dev
<ScoTtK2> jdong: iIRC, yOU've done some worK On Audacious.  AsSUmING tHAt's cOrrEct, I'd be inteRestED in yOur oPInIon OF Bug 202518?
<uBotu> LAuNChPAd bug 202518 in audacious "[FFe] meRge audAciouS 1.5.0-1 from Debian(UnStable)" [UndeCIDEd,New] httPs://laUNcHPad.net/bugs/202518
<protOnchrIs> PreviousLY, I have doNe FFES for upgrAding packAGEs to upstReaM reLeaSes THAt Just fix bugs.  I fOUNd a pAcKage wheRe tHe versiOn iS ovEr 2 yEarS oLd.  So an upgRade woulD mOsT lIkEly IncluDE new featUrEs.  WHaT arE the cHAnces oF a FFE BeinG gRaNTed?

 works
<hellboy195> LucidF ox: beagle ? ^^<bm k78 9>  and  itis VERY fast
< f ta>most people complainin g abo ut that ha d a m ix of x u l1 . 9  b4  a nd  ff 3b 3<Scot tK2 > jdong : Is there  an yreason not t o  m ake rosega rde n build-deplib fftw3- de v | fftw3 -de v sosource backpo rts aren' tn eededi n the f u t ur e?
< jdong> ScottK2: t h at sounds like abetter  i d ea < Sco ttK 2> jdong:I' ll go ahead a n dd o thi s  one, but ple ase fix iti n H ardy s owed on't n eed t on ext  time.
<Sco ttK2 > jdong:Wouldy ou do m e  a favo r andloo k a t wh a two uld  b e  ne e de d f o r a  WINE ba ck po rt.
< jdon g > S cott K2:  wel l doyou think it' s o kayt o p ut tr ansis iona lbuild  depsliketh at into Hardy?<Sco ttK2> I d on' tsee  a  down s ide ri sk.   D o you? Maybea skaf e w  o thers.
<jdong> Sco tt K 2 :I don'tsee an y  r is k , I'm ju st  no t su r e  if a nyon e  w ill cryand wh i ne  a bout bu il d-depbl oat  to  supp o rt b ackpor ts packa ges
< j dong> ScottK2: I don't mindd oi n g  i t , ju stthere's som ethi n g ab outu pl oad i ng to  Hard yt of ix a -backports pro bl em...doesn 't sound righ t
<jdong>S c o ttK2: an d ye s ,I  will look int o a W INE backpo r t
<Scott K2> j dong: ro segardenF T BFS in m y p bui lde r f o r  G utsy due to n o libj ac k-dev
< Sco ttK2> j don g:IIR C,yo u've done  some wo rk  o nAu dac ious.  Assumin gtha t' s c orrec t , I'dbe in tere st ed inyour op i ni o n  ofBu g2025 18? 
< ubotu > La u nch pad bug  202518 i n a u daci ou s"[FFe]Merge audacio us  1.5.0-1 f ro m D ebian( U n stable)"  [Undecided,New] https: / /launch pad .net/ bugs /202518
< pro tonchr is> Previo usly,I hav edon e FFEsf o rupg ra ding packa g e s t o ups tr eamrelease s that just fix bu g s. I found a pa cka ge w h e re  th e  v e rsi on iso v er 2 years old.   So an up gr a de  would mos t  li ke ly incl ude new  feat u res.  W hat are t he chance sof a F FEbeing gran ted?

 works
<hellboy195>_LucidFox: beagle?_^^
<bmk789> and it is_VERY fast
<fta>_most_people complaining_about_that had a_mix of xul1.9_b4 and ff3 b3
<ScottK2>_jdong: Is there_any_reason not to make rosegarden build-dep libfftw3-dev | fftw3-dev so source backports aren't needed_in_the future?
<jdong>_ScottK2:_that_sounds like a better idea
<ScottK2>_jdong: I'll go ahead and_do this_one, but please fix it in Hardy so_we_don't need to_next time.
<ScottK2> jdong: Would you do me a favor_and look at what would be_needed for a_WINE_backport.
<jdong>_ScottK2: well do you_think it's okay to put transisional_build deps like that into Hardy?
<ScottK2>_I don't see a downside risk. _Do you?  Maybe ask a_few others.
<jdong> ScottK2: I don't_see any_risk, I'm just not sure_if anyone will_cry and_whine about build-dep_bloat to support backports packages
<jdong> ScottK2:_I don't mind_doing it, just there's something about_uploading_to Hardy to_fix_a_-backports problem..._doesn't sound right
<jdong>_ScottK2:_and yes,_I_will look into a WINE backport
<ScottK2>_jdong:_rosegarden FTBFS in my pbuilder for Gutsy_due to no libjack-dev
<ScottK2>_jdong:_IIRC, you've done some_work on Audacious.  Assuming_that's correct, I'd be interested in_your opinion_of Bug_202518?
<ubotu> Launchpad bug 202518 in audacious "[FFe] Merge audacious 1.5.0-1 from_Debian(Unstable)" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/202518
<protonchris> Previously, I have_done FFEs for upgrading_packages to_upstream_releases that just_fix_bugs. _I found a package where the version_is over_2 years old.  So an_upgrade would most likely_include_new features.  What are the_chances of a FFE being granted?
