Hi Everyone, I'll try to give everyone something else to discuss besides DFSG and license issues. I've filed two bugs asking maintainers to enable some compile-time features of packages (or split out the feature-enabled version into it's own package), bugs #222421 and #231472. In both cases I provided a patch to enable the feature in a split out package or enabled in place. Now neither patch was really rejected out of hand by the maintainers but both were concerned by feature-creep and having to maintain N^2 packages to support every feature. While I understand this reluctance to some degree I'm curious what other developers have done in similar situations? What kind of trade offs do you make between features and dependency-creep? Do we have an obligation to our users to enable the features they ask for? In the case of #222421 especially, I feel Josip is sort of dragging his feet on the issue. The bug asks to enable ldap support in maildrop. Since libldap2 is a priority important package, it is almost certainly installed on the system anyway, so enabling this support would not bring in any more dependencies. I realize this not a critical issue, but what do we do when useful feature XYZ is not included because the maintainer does not deem it important? -- Eric Dorland <eric.dorland@mail.mcgill.ca> ICQ: #61138586, Jabber: hooty@jabber.com 1024D/16D970C6 097C 4861 9934 27A0 8E1C 2B0A 61E9 8ECF 16D9 70C6 -----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK----- Version: 3.12 GCS d- s++: a-- C+++ UL+++ P++ L++ E++ W++ N+ o K- w+ O? M++ V-- PS+ PE Y+ PGP++ t++ 5++ X+ R tv++ b+++ DI+ D+ G e h! r- y+ ------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature