Re: Doc packages
On Wed, 30 Jun 2004, Otavio Salvador wrote:
> cdd-dev is a binary package and this doesn't build-depends of any
Sure, but it should prepare a ready to run debian/control file for
*all* CDDs to keep necessary editing as low as possible for
meta package builders. If the CDD meta package source needs different
Build dependencies you will have to do extra editing and research
which is not really hard but breaks the consistency.
> If some maintainer what to *use* cdd-dev this does't need your your
> build-deps installed, only deps. Your packages then will build-depend
> of cdd-dev and of one doc tool, if need.
> This is what I see. Is wrong?
Your arguing is not wrongf but as I said I would love if the control
file looks always the same with only one exception: The CDD name.
all further differences should be kept out. As I've said I thought
about including the <cdd>-doc package into the meta-package building
source package but currently I'm not convinced that it is worth doing
it at the price of loosing consistency.