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

Re: Bug#726533: RFS: 0install/2.3.3-2 [ITP] -- rename and split zeroinstall-injector package



 ❦ 24 décembre 2013 00:15 CET, Thomas Leonard <talex5@gmail.com> :

> That's currently the case, but probably won't be for long. The next
> version (which is nearly ready) is written in OCaml rather than
> Python. At that point, I'll probably separate the GTK plugin from the
> main binary.

It wuld be better to make the split at this point. Currently, you are
replacing one package by one regular package and two empty
packages. Each packages comes at a cost (entries in the package
database), so we try to keep their number down.

> I could keep it as a single package (I don't really mind). Would it
> trigger any warnings to include a binary that depends on symbols that
> aren't required dependencies of the package?

You'll get a build warning but nothing from Lintian I think. But once
you have something to put in the 0install package, there is no problem
for the split.
-- 
Debian package sponsoring guidelines:
 http://vincent.bernat.im/en/debian-package-sponsoring.html

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: