Does libgpod have a (pro)active maintainer in Core?

[Jeff Spaleta]

On 11/19/06, Alexander Larsson <alexl at redhat.com> wrote:
> I've recently (last week or so) been given the maintainership of a bunch
> of packages, including libgpod. I'm always overloaded with work, but I
> will try to take a look at these problems. Of course, I have never even
> looked at these packages before, so I could use help as much as
> possible. :)

There are multiple people who have spun up out-of-tree updates of
libgpod now. it should be enough to read through the comments on the
bugs I referenced previously.  One of the bugs I reference, should
even has a spec to roll the new 0.4 version, producing the python
bindings as a subpackage in Core  without requiring the python-eye3d
from extras. There is community work being done to address this, but
like I said, there has been a lack of comment from maintainerside
through bugzilla so far, so I was concerned that there was a
maintainership breakdown and this was falling through the cracks.

At the very least you should talk to the maintainer for listen in
Extras for coordination if an update gets pushed.  It really doesn't
matter where the python bindings live, Core or Extras, but libgpod
needs to be updated to atleast 0.3.2 in fc6 if not 0.4 to make the
bindings buildable inside Fedora-space.

-jef"puts away his eye-poking stick"spaleta