D14486: Update to current mdbtools

[Pino Toscano]

pino added a comment.


  [ snip OT talk about distros, and limited POV on them ]
  
  > All this is not your fault but definitely fault of distributions not being able to integrate. How in this situation application developers have to be urged to integrate codebase to a single when distributions do not share the same mind set?
  
  You know, this is not a "us vs. them", "do software and they break it", but rather should be a **cooperation** -- an upstream helps helps downstreams in shipping the best way of upstream softwares.
  There is no "same mind set", since we are not an hive mind.  We are all humans, we can make mistakes (**both** sides), and the important is making sure they issues are fixed.
  
  And btw, since you mentioned it: if sometimes distros are "not [being] able to integrate", sometimes it is because upstream does poor/unclear/wrong choices that make the packaging work hard, or even impossible.
  
  > If you say Debian barely uses mdbtools there's not much to fight about
  
  And I explained so already: you cannot complain that mdbtools is not much used, if what KEXI currently does is actually part of the reason why mdbtools is not used much.
  
  > so your is proposal correct but of a very low priority for me.
  
  Considering somebody else other than you invested their time in updating the embedded copy (i.e. this differential revision), then it is just matter of adding the build system knobs to use a system library.  After all, both the update of the embedded copy and the switch to the system library will require careful testing, so there is no difference nor increase in work needed from this POV.

REPOSITORY
  R71 Kexi

REVISION DETAIL
  https://phabricator.kde.org/D14486

To: staniek, piggz
Cc: pino, Kexi-Devel-list, clybekk, barman, staniek
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/kexi-devel/attachments/20180730/1280ea4a/attachment.html>