repodata shot?

[Paul Howarth]

On Sun, 2006-07-09 at 20:22 +0200, Hans de Goede wrote:
> 
> Paul Howarth wrote:
> > On Sat, 2006-07-08 at 18:38 -0700, Ian Burrell wrote:
> >> On 7/8/06, Paul <paul at all-the-johnsons.co.uk> wrote:
> >> You are using the rawhide repositories, not FC5.  My impression is
> >> that GNOME 1 and Gtk 1 packages were removed from development.  Some
> >> have been added to Extras but gnome-libs is not one of them.
> > 
> > I'm working on that. Hope to submit it (and its deps ORBit and libpng10)
> > for review sometime next week.
> > 
> 
> Ouch, legacy people, legacy how many apps need these?

Not that many, but the number is more than one. 

> How hard would it be to port them to something newer,

My interest in this is that libglade is needed to build php-gtk, which
in turn is needed by pptpconfig, a GUI tool for configuring PPTP-based
VPNs. Work on porting php-gtk to GTK2 and PHP5 has been going on for
well over a year now but it's still only at a pre-alpha stage. Work on
migrating pptpconfig to pygtk2 has also started but is stalled on a lack
of manpower (and I can't help because I don't know python). So for the
FC6 timeframe, the old stack will be needed. Now I could just dump all
of the needed packages into the upstream pptpclient repo, but I'd rather
have them in Extras because:

1. They'll get reviewed first, and
2. They'll be available on more architectures than I can build for, and
3. I'm not the only one supporting legacy apps.

> what will be more work in the near future?

There's a few days' work now in getting the packages ready for Extras
and through the review process. After that, since these are all legacy
libraries with no real changes going on upstream (though libpng10 has
had a security update this year), ongoing maintenance should not be a
big issue.

Paul.