[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Source packages for documentation (was Re: Next approach)

Jim Pick writes:
 > Maybe I should summarize in different language, to see if other
 > people understand the concept as I understand it:

Your language seems to express quite the same I was thinking about,
but with quite a great deal of additionnal interesting stuff !

 > 1)
 >     What is inside a package would be determined by a field in the
 >     control file for the package.  These files could have different
 >     filename extensions and be placed in different directories on
 >     the FTP sites depending on their contents - but the packaging
 >     system wouldn't care what they were.

Yes. but is this multi-extension feature really useful ? The directory
structure might be sufficient ?

 > 4)  Converters can be provided that will convert packages
 >     in a "source" state into packages in a "binary" state
 >       - but there might be multiple stages
 >     I'm using the terms "source" and "binary" loosely - and
 >     there might be multiple conversion steps involved.  I
 >     also use the term "compile" loosely to signify the 
 >     transition between states.

OK, you spotted why I'm reluctant to use these terms :)

 > 5)  The packaging system (or perhaps a new subsystem) can handle
 >     conversion from the source state to the binary states.

Wow! This reminds me a proposal I sent, requesting for comments about
an idea of a debian-specific server. ("RFC: a "debian-daemon"
project", 16th May). Great idea!

 > (anyone else think this is cool?  or am I out in outer space
 >  somewhere?)

This makes me a bit more confident, I was beginning to think I was
somewhere as you said :)
Yann Dirson <dirson@univ-mlv.fr>

TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org . 
Trouble?  e-mail to templin@bucknell.edu .

Reply to: