Bug#38902: PROPOSED] data section
Quoting "Darren O. Benham" <gecko@debian.org>:
> On Thu, Jun 03, 1999 at 07:33:03PM -0500, Steve Greenland wrote:
> > A few additional rules for your consideration:
> >
> > - The data directory shouldn't be synced to debian releases, and ought
> > to be paralled to dists, not main/contrib/non-free.
> > (Since there are no executables, what's the benefit of syncing it, with
> > the presumed multiplying of size and hassle? If a dataset needs a
> particular
> > program or version, a simple dependency should be enough.)
> I thought about this... but in the case of a format change, a reader would
> have to be downloaded out of unstable (if you have a stable dist) or the
> data would have to wait until unstable is stablized. If there is no change
> in the data, then symlinks should suffice to not create a duplicate of
> data. Espcially if they DON'T change very often.
Agree with Darren on this. Even if they're not likely, data packages
can depends on version. Maybe when we got a different way for handling
the Releases cycles we could make it but it's currently too much difficult,
IMHO.
>
> > A thought: Do we need to keep a source archive separate from the .deb?
> > Almost all of these package are effectively their own source, and since
> > we are talking about large datasets, the burden of keeping both seems
> > unnecessary. Before you light up the flamethrower, I'm not promoting the
> > idea of not releasing source. But consider a package that is basically
> > a reproduction of a website. Do we really need two 7Mb packages who's
> > fundamental difference is that they unpack into a different location?
> > Instead, we could make the .debs act like installers, except that
> > they would grab the external archive from the CD or via http. Or have
> > a /usr/doc/<package>/debian, whose rules file has a way to copy the
> > installed data into a new tree in order to rebuild the package.
> Very good point. From what I understand, ammendments to proposals should
> be "convince the proposer" so if you agree with this, steve, consider me
> convinced to amend as follows:
>
> - Data debs should include all files from the original, upstream source
> installed into proper directories for Debian's requirements. So being,
> a seperate source archive need not be kept.
Change in the format of source-file implied really too much change.
How dinstall will handle those files? Where the files will appear?
Only in all arch? In source? In which format? Deb or orig.tar.gz?
Remember that some people only buy source CDs.
Also, I don't think this is need in this proposal. So, consider I object
to this amendment, and suggest you, instead, to move it to another
proposal or fill a bug against dpkg-dev or ftp.debian.org or dinstall,
whichever you care.
> >
> > Steve
> >
> >
>
> --
> Please cc all mailing list replies to me, also.
> =========================================================================
> * http://benham.net/index.html <gecko@benham.net> <>< *
> * -------------------- * -----------------------------------------------*
> * Debian Developer, Debian Project Secretary, Debian Webmaster *
> * <gecko@debian.org> <secretary@debian.org> <lintian-maint@debian.org> *
> * <webmaster@debian.org> <gecko@fortunet.com> <webmaster@spi-inc.org> *
> =========================================================================
>
>
Regards,
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fabien Ninoles Chevalier servant de la Dame Catherine des Rosiers
aka Corbeau aka le Veneur Debian GNU/Linux maintainer
E-mail: fab@tzone.org
WebPage: http://www.tzone.org/~fabien
RSA PGP KEY [E3723845]: 1C C1 4F A6 EE E5 4D 99 4F 80 2D 2D 1F 85 C1 70
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reply to: