Re: New Package: spamdb 0.1 (source all)
The package took me 15 minutes to write. If I had to have hourlong
discussions on debian-devel about it I probably would not have done it.
If there is someone with a better package I will certainly retract the
package and the duplicated work will be on my part.
The predep is fixed in 0.2.
On 25 Oct 1997, James Troup wrote:
> Christoph Lameter <chris@waterf.org> writes:
>
> > Package: spamdb
> > Version: 0.1
> > Architecture: all
> > Pre-Depends: ed
> > Depends: wget
>
> 1) Why does this *Pre-*Depend on ed?
>
> " Sometimes, a package requires another package to be installed *and*
> configured before it can be installed. In this case, you'll have to
> specify a `Pre-Depends' entry for the package.
>
> You must not specify a `Pre-Depends' entry for a package before this
> has been discussed on the `debian-devel' mailing list and a consensus
> about doing that has been reached."
> [ Debian Policy (2.3.0.0) 2.3.4 ]
>
> Not only did you not discuss this on debian-devel, the pre-dependency
> is totally spurious, it's used in the postinst, which will only be run
> if ed is installed, if you had used a normal dependency.
>
> 2) And why *again* are you blatantly ignoring policy about announcing
> your intention to upload new packages?
>
> " you should post about your intentions to work on something to avoid
> duplicated effort."
> [ Developers Reference (0.1) 1.1 ]
>
>
> --
> James
>
--
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: