Maintenance of celt

[Steve Kowalik]

Ron wrote:
> No, it's not 'dead' at all.  What it is though is a bleeding edge new
> codec that upstream hasn't even frozen the bitstream format for yet.
> So if anyone is planning to depend on it right now, they probably will
> need to:
> 
>  - Figure out how _they_ plan to deal with that.  And how they plan
>    to tell their users that any files they create with it today may
>    not be readable tomorrow.
>  - Discuss with myself (and upstream) how _we_ are going to manage
>    that in a distro package context.  You can't rely on the usual
>    'well behaved stable library' rules here, it's still too new.
> 
> Since no one actually responsible for any potential dependency has either
> got in touch with me, or responded to my queries on behalf of others,
> there hasn't really seemed to be any urgency in churning this package.
> 
> If opal wants to use this now, the maintainers of it are certainly
> welcome to open such a dialogue.  There is no point rushing upstream
> into making compatibility guarantees before there are any 'end' users,
> so I've just been patient so far -- and how 'adversely' opal may be
> affected by this is really, entirely up to its maintainers.
> 
> I can update this any day.  But if you want that to not trash things
> on you, and me to care about that, then I'm going to have to know
> who you are, and what things we agree upon ...

Fair enough. Sorry for mistaking 'cautious' as 'dead'. I've made a
judgement call, and stopped opal in Ubuntu using celt in light of this.

Thanks,
-- 
                                        Steve
"You have a fear of nothingness, or in laymen's terms, a fear of ...
nothingness"
         - EMH, USS Voyager