[rfk-dev] code status
Peter A. H. Peterson
pedro at tastytronic.net
Thu Oct 13 18:06:38 CDT 2005
Quoting Alexey Toptygin:
> Sorry for not posting anything in a while. I've put out a new release of
> my rfk source. You can get it here:
...all those changes sound great. Thanks!
> As far as Debian packaging goes, I'm not a registered debian developer
> yet, so maintainership hasn't been handed over to me. I'm planning on
> doing that in the same time frame as Debianizing the new code base, which
> is some time after Autoconf support (Real Soon Now (TM)). I'm sorry about
> the slow pace of the work, but I've got a full-time job, and I'm trying
> to finish my bachelor's degree this semester (and I'm moving into a new
> house this month), so I hope you'll forgive me :-)
If there is anything I can do, please let me know. I think this would
be a good project for me to learn about autoconf with. For that
matter, if you are uninterested in the Debian work, I am willing to do
that, too. But if you're just busy, then we can wait on both, as long
as robotfindskitten isn't going to get kicked out of Debian. Neale?
> Lastly, people have been talking about putting the vanilla NKIs back into
> the binary. I don't really want to do this, as getting rid of this was
> half of the reason I started rewriting RFK in the first place. If the
> concensus weighs in the other direction, however, we could add that in as
> a compile-time option (so that NKIs would come from the binary,
> SYSTEM_NKI_DIR _and_ ~/.robotfindskitten). I guess deciding this is up to
> the community.
Personally, I think that it's nice to have some NKI built in. I think
the SYSTEM_NKI_DIR and ~/.robotfindskitten are awesome enhancements,
but all the time we were griping for dynamic NKI I don't think we ever
considered all the ramifications of it. The binary by itself should
have some useable content. But that's just my opinion.
Peter A. H. Peterson, technician and musician.
---=[ http://tastytronic.net/~pedro/ ]=---
More information about the rfk-dev