Hi thank you for picking up this topic.
I think it will be very adventegos to add it to 14.1 for the sake and
benefit of all users of TDE.
I do not think it is a lot of work, but rather making the right choice as
Sl�vek pointed out.
I do not know all details at the level you know, but what I know is that you
need to pass the appropriate options to the configure script, so it will
require for example TDE specific debian directory, to build for TDE. This I
have already uploaded.
At my level of experience I would opt for less effort, so 2 rules out. I can
not comment on 3 as I do not know what is the effect. I have participated
in project using 1.
ATM I am not sure which approach I exactly use for my own build, but checked
out only the branch related to tqt and I put it into edeps.

Preferably we should automatically track and follow the upstream. I am not
sure if this was merged or somehow in a branch. I think you are more
competent to understand how exactly it is setup on their end.

regards

Sl�vek Banko wrote:

> 
> Hi both,
> 
> in any case, we will need to make a decision about pinentry-tqt. As I
> understand, the code is now part of the upstream pinentry. Here are some
> ways to deal with this:
> 
> 1. Add a separate git repository that will follow upstream pinentry but
> only pinentry-tqt will be built during build in TDE. There would have to
> be an occasional merge with upstream, but we should have our own branches,
> our own tags, out own issues tracking... just as we do with libtdevnc and
> libvnc upstream.
> 
> 2. Add the pinentry-tqt code to tdeutils, as you mentioned. But this would
> mean manual synchronization between pinentry upstream and tdeutils.
> 
> 3. Add only a mirror of pinentry git repository but not as part of the TDE
> umbrella. And the packages will be built completely outside the other TDE
> packages.
> 
> What is your opinion?
> 
> Cheers