Bug#934948: Unnecessary dependencies vs multiple binary packages
On Mon, 26 Aug 2019 13:55:11 +0100 Simon McVittie <smcv@debian.org> wrote:
> That doesn't answer my question.
>
> I looked at this executable again and it seems as though its purpose is
> to query metadata about the autoprefixer nodejs library, analogous to
> the -config programs sometimes found in -dev packages (sdl2-config and
> so on). Is that correct?
>
> Is it run automatically by some piece of Node infrastructure (like the
> way the build systems of some SDL games automatically run sdl2-config
> to learn which compiler and linker options they should use for SDL),
> or is it intended to be run manually by a developer, or what?
>
> Is there any situation in which it would be run by a developer who does
> not already know that they have nodejs installed?
Since this package is already in the archive I'd like to focus on ruby-task-list only and reopen the discussion when another package fits the general question.
> > So in general there is two cases I want to be able to create multiple binaries.
> >
> > 1. Cases like node-autoprefixer if the executable is useful (in specific case of node-autoprefixer , I can live without the executable for now).
> > 2. Cases like ruby-task-list where there is more dependencies than the interpreter.
>
> I think these are different, and each should be considered on its own
> merits, so this bug might make more sense if it is cloned (split) to offer
> advice on the two different situations.
As said above, I'd like to drop node-autoprefixer case from this discussion. It was mainly brought as a reference to ruby-task-list list rejection and from (my understanding of) ftp master position that both cases are similar.
> For the node-autoprefixer case, if we decide that the executable is not
> sufficiently important to the overall function of the package to merit a
> dependency, it's probably useful to compare and contrast with cleancss.deb
> from the node-clean-css source package (which *is* a separate binary
> package, and it looks to me as though that was the correct decision).
So can we focus on ruby-task-list case for this bug?
> smcv
>
>
--
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
Reply to: