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

Re: Build-dependency for rasmol: cbflib

On Thu, Feb 28, 2008 at 4:12 PM, Andreas Tille <tillea@rki.de> wrote:
> [I take the freedom to quote your private mail to Debian-Med list and
>   hope you don't mind about ignorance of the netiquette in this special
>   case.]

No problem, and sorry for not following up sooner.

>    0. Think about group maintenance in DebiChem or Debian-Med
>       as well.

Group maintenance would be ok, but as mentioned in the ITP (#467655),
I'm not a big fan of maintaining patch stacks under debian/. I will
look into the merge mode in svn-buildpackage and see if I can
integrate it to my workflow easily, but this will take some time.

>    1. If it is a library you should probably follow the library
>       packaging guide.  This includes providing a package containing
>       the dynamical library as well as a -dev package with static
>       library and *.h files.
>       Hint: The most easiest way to build both is making usage of
>       automake and libtools.  If you have problems with this
>       you could ask on debian-devel.  If you decide to do so
>       it is a very good idea to talks to upstream about this first.

Policy 8.3 gives three reasons for making static-only libraries.
CBFlib scores two out of these three, namely

* libraries whose interfaces are in flux or under development
(commonly the case when the library's major version number is zero, or
where the ABI breaks across patchlevels)

* libraries which are explicitly intended to be available only in
static form by their upstream author(s)

I think the earliest time to start thinking about CBFlib shared
libraries is when there's another package besides Rasmol in Debian
depending on it.

>    2. I see large chunks of documentation in the source package
>       but no separate doc package.  I would strongly advise to
>       build a separate doc package.

Ok, I'll revise the package soonish.

>  BTW, did rasmol upstream accepted your GTK version?

Yes, the code is in the CVS, but maybe not in the next release.



Reply to: