Pirate Praveen dijo [Fri, Jun 19, 2020 at 12:47:51PM +0530]:
The general case was discussed earlier and a recommendation was
given at
https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=934948#54
I'd like a confirmation from you if katex was following your
recommendations or not. I think katex should be a separate binary
package because it is shipping a user facing executable. But ftp
masters don't agree with my interpretation.
Their rejection mail and explanation is given below.
Hello Praveen,
You raised this same question to me via private mail; I prefer to
answer copying the rest of the Committee, and in a public way.
I completely lack context regarding KaTeX (tried downloading its
sources, but I am a complete JS newbie and didn't get a hold on it
anywhere; don't know what components of it are packaged or not, nor
how is your proposed katex package structured, etc.), hence, there is
no way for me to express an opinion here. I do feel there is too much
soreness still expressed between you and the ftp-masters.
So, refering to the same mail you quote, the guidelines Simon
carefully worked out begin with:
1. When there is disagreement about the level of splitting necessary
between binary and source packages, we encourage maintainers and
the ftp team to communicate respectfully, and in particular
acknowledge that each other's goals are valid, even if arguing that
those goals should be outweighed by higher-priority goals.
We also encourage maintainers to be as clear as possible about the
purpose and relationship of the various parts of a source package.
This is, yes, hard to achieve - but we should strive to communicate
better before getting angry and calling in the cavalry.
Simon continued with some design principles, that I understand often
impact node.js work: "We should not have very large numbers of very
small binary packages" and We should not have very large numbers of
very small source packages". Is this the case you are arguing for?
I don't want to rehash the whole set of guidelines; I want to
understand the disagreement you are presenting.