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

Re: Bug#252632: ITP: wmtemp -- WindowMaker dock applet displaying lm_sensors temperature values

Moin Lars!
Lars Steinke schrieb am Samstag, den 05. Juni 2004:

> > >>> Considering the screenshots, they look radically different. 
> > >>
> > >> Indeed, they are not the same. As I have packaged that little app for me own
> > >> use I could as well let others benefit from my effort...
> > >
> > > Can't wmgtemp be 'themed' and both be merged into one deb? The
> > > functionality sounds identicaly and I bet there is a lot of code
> > > duplication in there.
> > 
> > Since the author of wmtemp grabed code from wmgtemp (it is written on
> > his webpage), I guess he tried to avoid code duplication. 
> > 
> > It is clearly not obvious that such merge would not require more work
> > than just packaging the two. And it is not like if there was not
> > plenty of different program doing almost the same thing in debian,
> > with subtle differences.
> Thanks Mathieu,
> you are speaking my mind exactly. Anyway, I am not a programmer, so
> merging the code of wmtemp and wmgtemp is not feasible for me and I
> don't think a 14k .deb is such a waste of project resources that it is
> worth the effort (of a code merge or even a lengthy discussion on
> debian-devel...) - or is it ?

Wrong, it is a waste. You do not only add ONE 14k .deb, you add a 17k
source plus dsc plus orig plus diff plus 10*14kB (for each arch, and
maybe more than that), and, last but not least, you make apt and dpkg
slower for EVERYONE even if many people do not care about some cute toy
for some weird WM.

And since the applications are similar and have exactly the same
Dependencies and Build-Dependencies, they should be merged into one
package. You don't have to merge the code, just combine the source

Eduard "hates one-file-packages for no reason" Bloch.
  ist ein weißer Stoff, der dem Kaffee einen herben Geschmack verleiht,
  wenn man vergißt, ihn hineinzutun.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: