Re: cleaning up our task packages
On 08-Dec-00, 02:29 (CST), Britton <fsblk@aurora.uaf.edu> wrote:
>
> Also, why should the user ever see a task like
> devel-common, shouldn't this be essentially depended on by all the dev
> tasks? And Debug should be pulled in for any languages for which it
> includes debugging tools.
No, that's backwards, there shouldn't *be* a "task-debug";
"task-devel-<lang>" should include the appropriate debugger. If there's
more than one, pick the one that crashes the least, or has the best
documentation or (better yet) tutorial.
Remember, we're trying to make things easy for people who don't yet have
the experience to make a choice. There is *nothing* about task packages
that prevents them from exploring other options. We can, for example,
pick gdb and ddd (no idea if that's the best choice), and if the user
later finds out about insight or code-medic, they can install them.
In fact, a quality task-* package would include in _its_ documentation
a (brief) discussion of why each package was chosen, and a list of
alternatives.
steve
--
Steve Greenland <stevegr@debian.org>
(Please do not CC me on mail sent to this list; I subscribe to and read
every list I post to.)
Reply to: