Re: Ubuntu and CDDs
On Tue, 28 Sep 2004, Sergio Talens-Oliag wrote:
I totally agree that working with current tools and try to enhace them is
the way to go and as soon as I've worked with them (really soon now :-) I'll
try to give as much feedback as possible.
As I said - I would offer to move your stuff to cdd-dev. It took me about
20 minutes for Debian Junior (while I needed about two hours to fix cdd
tools to cope with broken menu entries ...)
Just tell me where I can find your code.
Well, I don't have drawbacks about the current cdd-dev package (I still have
to use it to have any), what I don't like is the use of metapackages per-se,
the inclusion of empty packages on the pool just for selecting packages do
not really seem the right thing to do and the problems debian-edu
metapackages have caused blocking migrations from unstable to testing don't
seem reasonable either.
Sure. The trick behind using a common tool for the moment is that we
just have to change the tool and rebuild all CDD packages to switch from
the current "not so good but working solution" to a "better but yet
I promise I'll use current infraestructure, it's only that unfortunately I
have no code to upload right now (and maybe I'll start with the CDD doc,
anyway), but as soon as I have something I will do it right away.
Regarding to the docs I have currently no clue how to integrate these.
I would love to build also the docs within the cdd tools framework, but
I guess it is absolutely not realistic that all CDDs would use the same
doc building toolkit. I use two different for med-doc and cdd-doc
and I'm not satisfied with both of them.
After looking at debtags I found that a better way of declaring our meta
packages is to tag the included packages with a category equivalent to the
cdd and meta package, i.e., for a package included in an hypotetical
lliurex-server meta package we could use this in a /etc/debtags/tagpatch.d
I have really big hopes that Debtags might bring a really great enhancement
for the future, but according to Enrico (in Florence) it is just not ready.
will give you the list of packages using this tag from which is easy to
generate a dependency list for a metapackage.
At least this would require a strict policy about handling the tags.
Before this no control would be in the hands of the CDD builders.
I'll try to work on it next week (this week we are installing pilots and I'm
almost sure I will not have time for it) and add an option to generate
metapackages in this way using existing cdd-dev code in the subversion
Don't mind in asking me if there is some trouble