Re: RFC: QA vs NMU on ssystem - 3D solar system simulator
Paul Gevers wrote:
> Hello mentors,
>
> I like some comments on the following:
>
> I made some small changes to an orphaned package (ssystem), to fix a bug
> (#482936) and to fix some lintian errors/warnings. I understand that
> this should be a QA upload because QA is maintainer, but I might be
> wrong and that this should be a NMU. Am I right? Because upstream is
> dead, I don't know if I should adopt it, I don't know much about C yet.
> The program is pretty old, but apparently a lot leaner on processing
> power than it's descendant called celestia.
>
> Further, there is one lintian warning left:
> I: ssystem: arch-dep-package-has-big-usr-share 1224kB 83%
> I can (easily) fix this, but that way I change the package more than I
> think is appropriate for QA. What do others think? Should I fix this as
> well?
>
As far as I understand, if the package is orphaned, you could do that
change in the package, it would not be considered too 'abusive'. But you
do not have to, fixing only the bug is already a good contribution.
However, even if 83% of the package is architecture independent data,
the whole package uncompressed only takes about 1,5Mb, and the whole
compressed package is 'Mb. Even considering all the architectures, the
space saved in mirrors and in bandwidth transferred is not so big, and
IMHO does not justifies two separate packages (ssystem and ssystem-data).
--
mother-in-law <--> woman Hitler
-- anagrama
Eduardo M KALINOWSKI
eduardo@kalinowski.com.br
http://move.to/hpkb
Reply to: