On Mon, Sep 10, 2007 at 12:15:28PM +0200, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
> > gv.ml{,i} and ship it under /usr/lib/ocaml/3.10/graphviz/. More
> > details on how to do that can be found in the policy.
> OK, I wasn't sure how the policy applies to this particular case (and
Sorry, maybe there is a misunderstanding here, I was referring to the
*OCaml* policy [1] which does apply since you are in fact packaging an
OCaml library which contains the binding for Graphviz.
> I'm wondering whether putting the (OCaml) -dev part into the
> libgraphvizN-dev package would be acceptable, so as to limit the
> number of binary packages I'm building from a single source package.
Uhm, a tiny objections would be that it violates our naming convention
for OCaml libraries: "libXXX-ocaml-dev", but I wouldn't care much about
that. However, a major objection holds: libgraphvizN-dev at that point
will depend on ocaml itself, which is quite a lot of stuff in term of
disk usare. I don't think people would like to have to install OCaml if
they only care about developing C stuff.
> You can find the git tree on git.debian.org, any patch is very welcome.
> (And I'm also back on #debian-ocaml, now that my bouncer's back.)
Ok, thanks, but I don't think personally will have time to work on that
in the next few days, but I'll try to find some volunteer :-)
Cheers.
[1] http://pkg-ocaml-maint.alioth.debian.org/ocaml_packaging_policy.html/
--
Stefano Zacchiroli -*- PhD in Computer Science ............... now what?
zack@{cs.unibo.it,debian.org,bononia.it} -%- http://www.bononia.it/zack/
(15:56:48) Zack: e la demo dema ? /\ All one has to do is hit the
(15:57:15) Bac: no, la demo scema \/ right keys at the right time
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature