Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 18 Aug 2020 01:25:05 +0000
From:      bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org
To:        ports-bugs@FreeBSD.org
Subject:   [Bug 248692] multimedia/kodi: Update to 18.8 and take maintainership
Message-ID:  <bug-248692-7788-QQO5cZFPb7@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-248692-7788@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>
References:  <bug-248692-7788@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D248692

--- Comment #8 from James French <james@french.id.au> ---
(In reply to yzrh from comment #7)

I am only putting my hand up for maintainership so that it's looked after in
the interim. No-one seemed that keen on the 18.6 (later 18.7.X) bug discuss=
ion
to take it and it's been radio silence since 18.8 came out at the end of Ju=
ly.
If you're keen, then by all means I'm happy if you take it instead. I'm mos=
tly
just keen to see the port with a maintainer, whomever that is.

Slightly longer term, I was going to touch base with Tobias to see what the
plan was with kodi-devel after 19 is released. If it's going to keep tracki=
ng
the development branch then yeah, it makes sense to keep the two ports with=
 two
maintainers (assuming the kodi-devel maintainer isn't running kodi). If not,
then I was going to propose replacing this port with kodi-devel.

Unfortunately that API version filename is done by the upstream code itself.
It's something we could patch for and I suspect in all likelihood that it's
fine to omit that version specific symlink from our ports entirely. That sa=
id,
that filename is what the upstream build scripts generate though so I'm
reluctant to just tamper with it on the off chance it causes issues.

--=20
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.=



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?bug-248692-7788-QQO5cZFPb7>