[ Sent to the RFA for libmusicbrainz-2.1 and the RC bug of libmusicbrainz-2.0, as this relates to both ] On Thu, Nov 24, 2005 at 12:05:53PM +0100, Florian Ernst wrote: > On Sun, 18 Sep 2005 14:02:42 +0200, Andreas Rottmann wrote: > > I'd like someone adopt libmusicbrainz; [...] > > from my side. Maintainance of libmusicbrainz package is not very time-consuming, you > > should be familiar with C++ though. > > [...] > I'm just wondering as I might be interested... FWIW, I packaged the most recent upstream version, following my personal style, i.e. omitting cdbs. Files are at <http://people.debian.org/~florian/libmusicbrainz-2.1/>. Unfortunately there were some problems with the python bindings: contrary to what the upstream changelog suggests they were not included in the tarball, but those bindings currently only exist in CVS. However, they don't give any hint on what their copyright and redistribution terms might be; in previous releases there was at least a COPYING file in the python directory, even if no further reference was given inside the individual files, but now this one is missing, too. Thus I'm a bit hesitant to just copy them over... With respect to this new situation I'd prefer to omit the python bindings completely, despite the pending removal of the bindings as shipped with libmusicbrainz-2.0. Any thoughts? Cheers, Flo
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature