Re: mixing different upstream sources in one package
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Hi Jay
Jay Berkenbilt wrote:
>>From time to time, someone announces an intention to package some tiny
> script or program, and people suggest including it in some other
> package instead to avoid pollution of the archive with lots of tiny
> packages. Although I understand the reasoning and the issues here
> (additional overhead for each package), this has always bothered me a
> little. I'm not sure that, as an upstream author, I would necessarily
> want the debian version of my package to be bundled with other
> software that was similar in functionality but otherwise unrelated to
> my package.
>
> I've recently taken over maintenance of psutils and am gradually
> working through the outstanding bugs on that package. A few of the
> bugs suggest adding external programs. Assuming there are no other
> impediments (like licensing problems), do people generally think that
> it's reasonable to do this even if the other packages aren't really
> part of the upstream package? If so, are there usual mechanisms for
> doing this? What about version numbers?
>
> My inclination would be decline requests to add unrelated packages to
> psutils, but I thought I'd solicit input from others in case someone
> has some perl (oops, pearl) of wisdom that I have overlooked. Thanks!
Maybe you could consider to add a package psutils-addons or something
similar?
Cheers
Luk
- --
Luk Claes - http://people.debian.org/~luk - GPG key 1024D/9B7C328D
Fingerprint: D5AF 25FB 316B 53BB 08E7 F999 E544 DE07 9B7C 328D
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFDf2WT5UTeB5t8Mo0RArGCAJ9+3kDynQ68OrCg1XOkQ5Wb9qgKEQCgzEGT
Hu6Wb0xZdC4vbYZjdP136D8=
=hk7a
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Reply to: