Re: RFS: ccd2iso (ITP #373150)
[I'm subscribed, not need to Cc]
On Sat, 2006-06-17 at 12:43 -0700, Tyler MacDonald wrote:
> Laszlo Boszormenyi <gcs@lsc.hu> wrote:
> > Agree. Also, binary ones sounds better for me; or if someone would like
> > to reinvent the wheel, then please do it in Python instead of Perl.
> I certainly hope this is just your opinion and isn't official debian
> advice...
I know Perl has far more use in general and Python said to be a bit
overweight or so (I haven't follow the opinions for a while).
But just to be clear: this is _my_ opinion and _not an official Debian
advice_.
An other reason is that Perl is installed far more sooner as a
dependency, so such a rewritten package program would be installed
without too much other dependency.
On Sat, 2006-06-17 at 15:57 -0400, Alec Berryman wrote:
> Forget rewriting them, how about just aggregating them into one
> package?
Sounds better. I mean to one binary with switches like --from=<img_format>
and --to=<img_format> .
Cheers,
Laszlo/GCS
Reply to: