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

Re: search-citeseer_0.1-1_i386.changes REJECTED

Otavio Salvador <otavio@debian.org> writes:

> And no one is obliged to do all like James think. The package follow
> the policy and doesn't have any point in policy talking about size
> requeriments.

Policy is not everything that counts. Just because policy doesnt say
something it means it is good to do it.

Its a useless split, not needed and there is no benefit for the users.
One can say its against users - everyone that wants .el files needs to
install another package. :)

> Yes but to my sense is really better to enduser have this packages
> splited since the search-citeseer can work (without problems) without
> the -el part and I want provide this option for our users.

"It can work without" is not enough for a split. One reason, but not
everything. If we would split everything that "works without the rest
in the package" we would end up with thousands of useless small
packages. We already have enough packages in the list, we dont need
things there we can avoid without problems.

bye Joerg
<elmo> if klecker.d.o died, I swear to god, I'm going to migrate to gentoo.

Attachment: pgpO_Cq4ydqH3.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: