On 14 Aug 2014 17:43, "Thorsten Glaser" <tg@debian.org> wrote:
> > It is also worth noting that the Debian package version for XStatic
> > modules is following the static file package version. For example, even
> > though upstream released XStatic-JQuery 1.10.2.1, the Debian package
> > version is 1.7.2.0, to match the version number of libjs-jquery.
Finding it hard to understand the reasoning here.
> Idea here: can’t python-xstatic-jquery just take over libjs-jquery
> via Provides, so we have one binary package less after this? (Of
> course, if the Debian JS maintainers agree, and probably will want
> to (co-)maintain python-xstatic-jquery after this.) Similar for the
> other ones. That would mean we’d have almost zero cost for the addi‐
> tion of python-xstatic-* because they’d just take over the non-xstatic
> ones and provide the same functionality plus more.
In what way will python-xstatic-jquery be better than libjs-jquery?
Still trying to understand this.
Thanks