fluid-dev
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [fluid-dev] FluidSynth 1.0.9 released


From: David Henningsson
Subject: Re: [fluid-dev] FluidSynth 1.0.9 released
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 2009 09:45:47 +0200
User-agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.21 (X11/20090409)

Josh Green skrev:
> On Sun, 2009-04-12 at 12:26 +0200, David Henningsson wrote:
>> Josh Green skrev:
>>> With all the new development interest, I've been realizing that my lack
>>> of time for the project has been hindering progress somewhat.  For this
>>> reason there will be some changes in the development process and
>>> delegation of responsibilities to other individuals.  
>> I'm interested to know more about this and perhaps to be deeper involved
>> with FluidSynth core development in the future.
> Yes yes!  The more the merrier.  A start is to get you a subversion
> account.  Send me an email directly with your desired login/pass.

Done. Anything else I should know when it comes to comitting patches?

>> I have also started to work on getting the new 1.0.9 version into Debian
>> - it was abandoned, so I intend to become the new Debian maintainer for
>> FluidSynth. It's my first official package so I might have some related
>> questions for you as well as the Debian mentors.
> That is great, I didn't realize that the Debian package had been
> abandoned.  I guess there has been so few releases in the past few
> years.  Its nice that that is changing.

I've already run into trouble with the debian package, interested people
can have a look here:

http://lists.debian.org/debian-mentors/2009/04/msg00244.html

Btw, do you know any other GPL code we (optionally) link to, more than
lash/ladcca?

> Since there are a number of individuals who have recently become
> interested in FluidSynth development, I think it would be a good idea to
> introduce ourselves a bit and mention what interest we have in
> FluidSynth and how we would like to help out.  I'll post a new email
> thread to this effect, to get things started.

Seems like a very good idea. I could also have use for some pointers to
why it was decided to fork the project into an 2.x branch.

// David





reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]