Alexis Sukrieh wrote: > * Gunnar Wolf (firstname.lastname@example.org) : > > I will be mostly tied up with my RL job until February, when Etch is > > (hopefully) out. There are some seemingly quite simple bugs and > > features ready to be squished in it, but I prefer to take a good look > > before doing that - And I love to have Etch's dh-make-perl in a better > > shape than what it is today. Hence the offer/request. > > I think it's a very good idea to put dh-make-perl in the team's > hands. I also agree on the fact it could be better to put dh-make-perl's > sources in a different place than the lib- stuff. > > Why not renaming `pkg-perl/packages' to `pkg-perl/lib-packages' and > using `pkg-perl/packages' for the non-lib stuff? I don't think that's a good idea. After all, AFAIK the Perl group also maintains a few packages that are not libraries but Perl apps. Separating libs and apps just for the sake of it doesn't make a lot of sense IMO. If you want to separate dh-make-perl from the "regular" packages, then better put it into a "tools" dir or something.
Description: PGP signature