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

Re: [Pkg-octave-devel] QtOctave: removal of simplercs

On 8 May 2010 04:16, Thomas Weber <thomas.weber.mail@gmail.com> wrote:
> I'm currently packaging the 0.9.1 release of QtOctave.

Would you let me handle it? Unless you already have almost all of the
work done, I could use the packaging practice, and since this is "my"
package, it's one whose packaging structure I know best.

Btw, would you be willing to sponsor my updated qrupdate package?

> Stripping it completely is fairly complex (adapt the menus for it,
> ...), so I'm actually reluctant to do it

What about putting it in a different binary package and make QtOctave
Suggests: it?

> On the other hand, we have like a dozen VCS systems in Debian, and
> even the most archaic of them has far more features than simplercs.

I wonder if *users* of QtOctave expect simplercs to be there or not.
My guess is they don't: it looks like a side project of upstream that
got bundled with QtOctave but is overall pretty irrelevant to the
functionality that they expect out of QtOctave. I think putting it in
a separate binary package wouldn't be such a bad idea, and it wouldn't
require rewriting menus.

> There's also the fact the QtOctave dumps a half dozen binaries in
> /usr/bin, with pretty generic names (simplercs, qtinfo, ...), which
> may lead to a problem down the road.

Yeah, Lintian is nagging about those not having manpages. Even though
the names are fairly generic, I don't think we need to worry about
that now. When problems arise, renaming is simple enough to do.
Furthermore, it might not even be our problem to rename, but whoever
else uploads a package with a conflicting binary name. ;-)

- Jordi G. H.

Reply to: