Packaging (Beryl AND Compiz packages)

[Fabio Berta]

Binary package hint: compiz

I think the current situation of compiz in universe could be greatly improved. Currently we have a bit dated version from the quinn tree right?
As we all know, there was a fork of compiz, beryl. So my proposal is, package up a recent version of beryl and name it beryl and package up the upcoming 0.2 release (in the next few days) of the official compiz and name it compiz.
This way, everbody would be happy, the ones who want beryl and the ones who trust in the freedesktop.org version.

[PaulSchulz (paulschulz)]

Greetings,

From the #beryl-devel IRC list..
<DBO> pschulz01, no, beryl will not make edgy
<DBO> we are past the feature freeze
<DBO> we will be lucky just to get the libwnck patches in
<DBO> which I am working on right now

[Jason Smith (jassmith)]

as an adendum to that, I would like to be pleasantly surprised. (I am DBO btw)

[John Vivirito (gnomefreak)]

closing this because we are working to try to get beryl in edgy+1. I personally see a good chance it will make it in edgy+1 but still too early to tell.

[mc44 (mc44)]

Would it not be a good idea to replace the compiz package in universe with official compiz head 0.2 when released, to avoid alot of confusion after edgy release, as a major reason for the fork was namespace issues?

[Fabio Berta (fberta)]

Actually, replacing the current version of the compiz package with the official 0.2 release is what I would really like to see! Beryl would be a bonus, but honestly I don't really care about it, because I use fdo.org version.

[Jason Smith (jassmith)]

The namespace issue was really never a major reason for the fork, and as far as replacing it with fdo goes, most users are used to compiz-quinn and will expect that. So either way we go there will be confusion, I figure its just as well to leave things alone if there is no way to get beryl in to edgy.