[Fingerforce-devel] Any news on Kensi Muto mail?

[Miguel Gea Milvaques]

Luca Capello wrote:
> Hi Miguel!
>
> On Tue, 08 Jan 2008 22:10:59 +0100, Miguel Gea Milvaques wrote:
>   
>> Did you received any answer from Kensi Muto about fprint package?
>>     
>
> Not yet :-(
>
>   
>> We could package it and don't wait. What do you think? (I have
>> preliminar packages for libfprint and pam-fprint)
>>     
>
> The first time I read Kenshi-san blog post I was a bit upset, because an
> ITP was already open and he doubled the work.  However, to be kind on
> him, we can check his packages and incorporate any useful change into
> our repository and add a note in debian/copyright or whatever.
>
> So, yes, I'd say that we should go on and upload it.
>
> While we're at it, about ThinkFinger: since the last time I imported an
> SVN checkout (back at the beginning of December [1]), I found another
> bug in the automake stuffs [2], so I prepared a new upstream tarball
> (0.3+rev118.2).  However, in order to avoid the same previous error with
> svn-import, I put it in my ToDo list and then quite forgot it.
>
> While ThinkFinger will be eventually replaced by fprint, I don't like to
> have unresolved bugs (#452178 [3]), so I'm for updating a new version to
> experimental that fix that bug and then after fprint has been tested a
> bit more on Debian, update a dummy package that depends on fprint.  Is
> it OK for you?
Nice. On other hand. does thinkfinger provide any additional 
functionality that fprint lacks?
(as different/better devices support) If the answer is yes, and if you 
think that thinkfinger has been enough tested, it could be uploaded to 
unstable.

I've been talking with Dererk about wait till this weekend to upload the 
packages to our svn, test them and then upload to Debian. The library is 
enough stable to go to unstable, but I'm not too sure if the pam module 
is enough good. And I'm not sure if it's secure enough.

What do you think about it?