Re: Rethinking Qt headers (should the header packages be recombined?)
onsdagen den 26 februari 2003 23.15 skrev Ben Burton:
> The thing is that most users *aren't* package maintainers, and most
> people who build some application that they download from the net
> *aren't* the developer of that application.
... cut ...
> Sure, but I'll argue that this isn't something we should force users to
> do. It's the job of the developer to remove legacy headers from their
> applications. I don't think debian should be forcing users to discover
> and then work around these problems.
I agree. I have built packages for quite some applications for KDE, and they
are of very varying quality, and often have various "faults" in them. It can
be hard enough, as it is, trying to overcome the problems, without debian
making it harder. I think many (new) packers are just happy that the
applications build at all, not having to make modifications just to make it
compile. The problem is also that the more modification a maybe not so
experienced packer have to do, the more chance of doing something wrong.
I am happy if something build with as little modifications as possible. I
don't want to get into "improving" the code for upstreams, just to make it
"the right way".
And then the debain/control dependencies. It can be hard to get them all for a
KDE applications. Not even the experienced official debian KDE maintainers
gets them right all the time, what to speak about some newcomer just wanting
to pack a small application. I think that kdelibs[4]-dev should take care of
all KDE requirements.
I think it is fantastic that the packing of the qt module is fixed, since it
was always a pain to rebuild it. It was something really needed.
Karolina
Reply to: