From: Daniel P. <da...@po...> - 2015-02-03 22:14:27
|
On 03/02/15 22:59, Devon H. O'Dell wrote: > I'm one of the CK developers interested. It's been a PITA to find time > to get a DD to sign a key in person. Samy has just started a new company > and I'm pretty sure that's kept him busy enough that he's had trouble > finding the time too. The problem with getting onto the build machines > was getting the key signed. That's an orthogonal problem, we can take > that up off-list. Sooner or later we'll get that sorted out - there are Debian Developers just about everywhere these days. > I've got a patch using APR rwlocks. Working with Vlad to get it tested > in our environment. The future changes requiring CK would be much more > invasive than just the change to remove it, so from a release > engineering perspective, I don't see any reason to start from here as a > branch point. I can fish out the commit with all the configure stuff > when that actually happens. > If you think it is feasible, you could also have both, using pre-processor conditional logic and an option to the configure script. Distributions would build it the normal way and there would be no need for branching in the repository. |