On 01:52 Tue 09 Jun , Jonas Smedegaard wrote: > >Well, My point of view is that you could ask upstream to do 3 tarballs > >and separate them. And if upstream don't want to do that, keep all 3 > >modules in one package. They are not big so it's not annoying having > >them shared in one package. > > > >What I hope you will not choose is to separate the 3 modules in 3 > >package and keep this tarball with the 3 modules inside. That's bad ! > > I fail to see what is bad about current packaging. I just mentioned that it's not a good idea to do 3 packages with a same tarball. > Yes, I agree that it would be even better if upstream was convinced to > release source split out, but since that is not currently the case, I > find it perfectly sane to package as described. Me too. That's not a problem. > It is wrong IMO to package the three modules together in a single binary > package, just because that's what upstream did. What do you suggest then if upstream don't want to separate these modules ? > The packages being small should not be a problem. If only there is a > need for the packages, then go for it. Agreed. My policy is to try to be minimalist as much as possible and to have installed only what is needed.. (maybe because I work on embedded systems ;) ) Greetings, -- ,''`. ** Xavier Oswald <xoswald@debian.org> : :' : ** Research Engineer `. `' ** GNU/LINUX Debian Developer (http://debian.org) `- ** Isaac Project Developer (http://isaacproject.u-strasbg.fr/)
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature