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

Re: [DebianGIS] OpenLayers 2.5 Debian Packaging



hi there,

On Monday 31 December 2007 06:29:23 am Christopher Schmidt wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 30, 2007 at 10:27:26AM +0930, Paul Wise wrote:
> > On Dec 30, 2007 9:24 AM, Christopher Schmidt <crschmidt@metacarta.com> 
wrote:
> > > It looks like this goes about halfway, and follows a similar pattern to
> > > what I did for the bits it does. I just added a lot more fluff around
> > > it, especially the actual linking of it into Apache.
> >
> > I'd like to see a discussion about how to package JS libraries, flash
> > bits and similar on the debian-webapps list, and perhaps something
> > written into the draft webapps policy:
> >
> > http://webapps-common.alioth.debian.org/draft/html/

that would certainly be nice.  in the case of flash etc, i imagine most of 
that could be addressed with a sentence or two about where the files should 
be located (since it's from an objective view it's just data being fetched 
from the webserver, right?)

but about javascript, maybe it's a little trickier since it's more of 
a "library" used by other applications.  for example the fckeditor mentioned.

> fckeditor has the same problem as the earlier packaging for OpenLayers
> -- it does not include anything to actually enable the application to be
> used, other than a comment in README.Debian.
>
> This is in violation of the "should" suggestions in
> http://webapps-common.alioth.debian.org/draft/html/ch-httpd.html.
> (Obviously not a bug -- simply a lack of functionality.)

which "should" suggestion does it violate?  i'm not convinced that it should 
be a policy violation not to enable a web application, assuming that it's at 
least documented in a README or examples file somewhere.  my reading on that 
section is that "_if you are going to register yourself with a webserver,_ 
then the following applies".

> I've CCed debian-webapps, though in the past 5 months there have only
> been 4 non-spam threads on that list, so I don't know how much response
> this will draw in.

sadly, yes, it's been pretty quiet.  for me personally my job description has 
changed a bit so i spend less time in the webapp world.


	sean

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.


Reply to: