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

Re: Bug#504528: libghc6-configfile-dev: Fails to configure: MissingH-1.0.1 doesn't exist

Joachim Breitner wrote:

> Ok, right. In this case you have to fix your cabal file and figure out
> how to tell dh_haskell_depends that this is your scheme. (Or we
> implement some advanced scheme as described earlier that works with the
> data from the cabal file directly).

Right, and I'm completely fine with that.

> Have you considered using using 1.2.3-1 with a native, non-diff-gz
> package?

I'm not quite sure I'm following...  you're suggesting that I upload a
source package that contains a .dsc and orig.tar.gz only, no diff-gz,
and name it 1.2.3-1?  I could be wrong, but last I checked this was
against Debian policy.  The Debian version part only can be there if a
Debian diff is also.  But I may be out of date on that.

In any case, I'm fine with how it's working.

> I see. So can I summarize your position:
>       * Better haskell-devscripts and -policy are good.
>       * Your current differences in package (e.g. documentation) are
>         mostly coincidal and you don’t mind haskell-devscripts changing
>         these.

Yes, quite right.

There was a reason originally that I wasn't using the -utils package.
Igloo and I had a disagreement about something.  I forget what it was
now, so I guess it doesn't matter ;-)

>       * You want to continue use native package version (with the last
>         digits indicating the debian revision), so dh_haskell_depends
>         ought to work with that.


>       * You don’t want to put your libraries under the umbrella of a
>         packaging group.

That may be put a bit strongly.  I would have to see how this is structured.

At the moment, my Haskell packages in Debian are *mostly* my own code.
I generally want to get code into Debian as soon as I make an "upstream"
release, and maintain my debian/ in the same tree.  I wouldn't want to
have to work out of two $VCS trees, etc.  I know everybody has a pet
favorite VCS, and if I'll be participating, I don't care what the team
uses as long as it's a dvcs.  OTOH, if they used git, it would make it
easy to bring my stuff into it.  And I would certainly be happy to
accept patches from people that improve my debian/ (or any of my code,
really), regardless of whether the team happens.

And if I'm not participating, what do I care if you chose CVS? :-)

For the packages I maintain that are not my code, I could see a benefit
more clearly for a team, if structured the right way.

Also, I don't really want to be a leader on Debian Haskell packaging
practices.  I don't maintain -devscripts anymore, nor do I maintain ghc6
or -utils.  The people that do are better equipped for that.  My
interest in packaging is getting it done well and fast.

Basically, if everyone involved here makes it easier for me to maintain
my packages, I will be happy.  It looks like that will happen.

Don't let me stand in the way of a team.  Who knows -- I might even like
it ;-)

-- John

Reply to: