Re: search-citeseer_0.1-1_i386.changes REJECTED
Peter S Galbraith <p.galbraith@globetrotter.net> writes:
> Otavio Salvador <otavio@debian.org> wrote:
>
>> [ I'm including the debian-devel list in CC since I appreciate the
>> opinion of others developpers ]
>>
>> James Troup <ftpmaster@debian.org> writes:
>>
>> > This package is dubiously small enough as it is without being split
>> > into two. There's no need to separate the 2k .el file into a separate
>> > package. If depending on emacs bothers you, make it a suggests.
>>
>> Yes, the packages is small *but* IMHO this should be splited in two
>> since the -el package can but not used. Other issue is the last
>> depends of emacsen and someone can doesn't like have an emacsen
>> installed in machine.
>>
>> -rw-r--r-- 1 otavio otavio 4.1K Oct 4 16:58 search-citeseer-el_0.1-1_all.deb
>
> Are you byte-compiling this elisp?
>
> AFAIK, you need to depend on emacs itself (and not emacs-common) if you
> byte-compile it. I _think_ stuff can break if you don't, but I'm vague
> on why. Search the debian-emacsen archives. I split off a package
> because of that issue a while back, but the seperate -el package is 62KB.
Yes. I'm byte-compiling this.
> If the above is correct, then you may bundle your .el file with the main
> package without depending on Emacs providing that you don't bye-compile
> it. If it's 4K, it's presumably a very small elisp file anyway.
Yes, is small but I've tried to do the most right package project
(but a bad decision cause the size of files).
--
O T A V I O S A L V A D O R
---------------------------------------------
E-mail: otavio@debian.org UIN: 5906116
GNU/Linux User: 239058 GPG ID: 49A5F855
Home Page: http://www.freedom.ind.br/otavio
---------------------------------------------
Reply to: