Rockbox mail archiveSubject: Re: Rockbox 2.5.1 for Archos Machines Updated
Re: Rockbox 2.5.1 for Archos Machines Updated
From: Tom Cole <tcole_at_xtra.co.nz>
Date: Sun, 07 Jan 2007 11:41:33 +1300
On Sat, 6 Jan 2007 03:03:16 -0800, "Zakk Roberts" <midkay_at_gmail.com>
>> Sorry john, by order of management, updates are prohibited!
>This is utterly ridiculous. You started with a "supported build plus a
>bug fix". That's easy to support and simple enough to be allowed on
>the wiki (the wiki, being hosted directly on the rockbox.org site, at
>least implies that anything found on it should be supported). Now you
>have "supported build with a number of patches, additions and fixes"
>to the point where we can't support it. That's simply that.
>You took a nice idea: fix a crucial bug or two in 2.5 to help out
>users; very kind, and I definitely thought it was cool that you took
>the time to do that. And then you blew it up into this unsupported
>build, and when we told you that we can't support this megapatched
>archive of code (which is totally acceptable on its own) you twisted
>it around like we're prohibiting you from updating/modifying the
>source and distributing it, and even suggesting we're going to rip it
>down. Yeah... right.
"Support" - Here we are back on the issue of support.
As I pointed out to Paul, this was *never* an Official Supported
Release. Any support needed was provided by me via the forums and
This was made quite clear on the wiki page from day one.
Quote from version 1 of the wiki page, 17th March 2006, complete with
"* This is an unofficial private release of Rockbox for the Archos
* This is not an official release of Rockbox by the develpers, but is
being made available for download here as some people have expressed
interest in using it."
>Modified builds are allowed. That's GPL! What we *cannot* do is
>support these modified builds. Your initial 2.5.1 build was an
>exception, because it was only a couple of bug fixes - no reason that
>should break any compatibility or introduce new bugs. Now it's just
>another "Rockbox how I want it to be" build in the giant repository of
>unsupported builds, and you need to put it there where it belongs.
No - it's *always* been a "Rockbox how I want it to be" build. Please do
not try to rewrite history.
Why did I post an update now?
Previously quoted to the list, replying to Paul:
"Recently, one of the developers advised me that I should provide the
source as this was a requirement of the Rockbox GPL licence. As I had
further developed my version for my own use I didn't have the source of
the version on the wiki page anymore. To put things right I have
provided new downloads plus the source as required."
The developer mentioned is Linus.
Anyway, I'm in the process of getting a hosting site organised, so we
can all wash our hands of the whole mess.
Received on 2007-01-06