Bug#38902: PROPOSED] data section
Quoting Goswin Brederlow <goswin.brederlow@student.uni-tuebingen.de>:
> Joey Hess <joey@kitenet.net> writes:
>
> > Branden Robinson wrote:
> > > If I understood the proposal correctly, bible-kjv and verse would both
> go
> > > into the new data section. "verse" because it's designed to work only
> with
> > > only one data file -- bible-kjv.
> >
> > That's silly. 'passwd' is a program designed to work with only 1 data
> file,
> > I don't think that puts it in data.
> >
> > I'm opposed to putting any binaries in data.
>
> But wouldn't be in the data section. if it would, what would be the
> point of passwd in main?
>
> Anything in main that depends on something in data shoulbe eigther be
> moved to data or the data should be moved to main.
Although I agree with you, in the spirit of my original draft, this choice
should not be write in the Policy because we can't really make a clear line
between what's need to be in main, and what's not. Astronomical data are
clearly big enough to be in data. lg issues are also good candidates.
But a small package like verses is more blured. Removing it will also
remove fortunes, and, BTW, gl-screensavers and games for irrelevance
from being parts of a workable Unix System. But people don't wan't this.
So don't make it a policy and let's decide it on a per package basis, just
like the sections field.
As for dependencies, consider data to be like a lesser priority than
extra or optional (don't remember which one is the lowest). The Policy
already that no packages should depends on priority lesser than itself.
I thinks it's should make things right.
>
> May the Source be with you.
> Goswin
>
>
Regards,
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fabien Ninoles Chevalier servant de la Dame Catherine des Rosiers
aka Corbeau aka le Veneur Debian GNU/Linux maintainer
E-mail: fab@tzone.org
WebPage: http://www.tzone.org/~fabien
RSA PGP KEY [E3723845]: 1C C1 4F A6 EE E5 4D 99 4F 80 2D 2D 1F 85 C1 70
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reply to: