libsonic source hosting

[Andrei Kholodnyi]

On Tue, Dec 7, 2010 at 3:03 PM, Bohdan R. Rau <ethanak at polip.com> wrote:
> At 1 - integration is essential, so it's not possible to make it optional

allow me to retort :D.
it is possible, I think we should do the way Halim has asked.

> At 2 - what's the problem with building speechd on other distros, if you
> have sources? For me the only problem is Ubuntu (because Canonical
> developers want to have it's product colourful, shinning, flashing, playing
> nice melodies and probably recitating Shaekspeare's sonets, but
> "accessibility" is only nice word which you can find on Ubuntu homepage).
> Simple example: dumbtts exists from about two years. As far as I know the
> only distro where libdumbtts exists as package and Ivona module is compiled
> by default is PLD, not Ubuntu...

Well, the problem is the integration, support etc.
E.g. if we decide to include sonic dependency in SPD, we need to be
sure sonic is supported,
easy accessible, packaged etc.

That's why I have suggested to include sonic directly into SPD source tree.
Then you have at least a control over it and no external dependency.
Otherwise I fear feature will be there but nobody will use it, due to
missing support.

> At 3 - it's problem for distros developers, not for speech-dispatcher
> developers. If developer, i.e. Debian's is not able to find sources which
> were slipped under his nose, he rather should engage in trade with parsley.

at the end it is SPD problem.