On Sun, 18 Oct 2009 00:01:41 -0400, Jonathan Yu wrote: > 2. it should probably be renamed to 'nopaste', The source or the binary package or both? given that it better > matches the point of this module (as a standalone application rather > than a library as the name suggests). I take it that many of the other > applications we have in Debian are written in Perl and are available > in CPAN, and yet do not carry a libXXX-perl style name. That's an old discussion, and both sides have valid points IMO. > I'm not sure what impact this will have, but we have done renames > before (for other reasons), so it can't be *that* big of an issue; > probably just requires an override from the ftp-masters. No, in this case we'd have a new binary package which is not in the overrides files and has to go through NEW (unless "provide"d packages are also there, but I doubt that). No tragedy but still. So far we've mostly renamed source packages, and if we do a s/blargh/libblargh-perl/ there and there already was a libblargh-perl binary package in the overrides file no ftp-master intervention is necessary. > It should be > noted that the reverse dependencies are still really small, 2, and both maintained by us. > and > instead of a "libapp-nopaste-perl" providing "nopaste", it would be > reversed. > However, given the latter (the package provides 'nopaste' as a virtual > package), I guess this is a moot point. Instead of deleting the above > point I've decided just to allow the group some input there. That's very generous :) Cheers, gregor -- .''`. http://info.comodo.priv.at/ -- GPG Key IDs: 0x00F3CFE4, 0x8649AA06 : :' : Debian GNU/Linux user, admin, & developer - http://www.debian.org/ `. `' Member of VIBE!AT, SPI Inc., fellow of FSFE | http://got.to/quote/ `- NP: The Dubliners: The town I loved so well
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature