Bug#131781: debian-policy: Proposed virtual packages: mixer and mixer-x
Package: debian-policy
Version: 3.5.6.0
Severity: wishlist
(I'm subscribed to debian-policy@l.d.o, no need to CC: me; As posted to
debian-devel@lists.debian.org):
Hey ho :) I recently started maintaining the package gqmpeg, which was
orphaned by Takuo KITAME.
Looking it over, one thing strikes me as particularily ugly.
Specifically:
[ david@willow: ~ ]$ acs gqmpeg | grep Recommends:
Recommends: xmixer | gnome-media | gom-x | gamix | mixer.app | kmix |
aumix-gtk | wmmixer | asmixer
Not only is that ugly and difficult to maintain, it might not even be a
complete list. It will be unpleasant confirming the latter, especially.
So, in accordance with virtual-package-names-list.txt, I'm starting out
by sending this letter to debian-devel@lists.debian.org (to which I am
of course subscribed ;), and suggesting the creation of two new virtual
packages, which I believe should be in the "Graphics and Multimedia"
section of the list, though that has no relevance to packaging itself.
mixer: Utility to control the input and output levels of a sound card.
Either a command-line interface or a text/console interface is required.
mixer-x: Utility to control the input and output levels of a sound card.
An X11-based interface is required.
Myself and a few others discussed the idea of just using "mixer" and
"mixer-gui", instead of "mixer-x". But, at least for gqmpeg, if the
package is going to have a relationship on a GUI mixer, it should be
able to declare that relationship with a specific environment. In
gqmpeg's case, X11. Using mixer-gui is too broad; at least with mixer-x
we leave room for mixer-fb, mixer-berlin, etc..
I'll be filing the wishlist bug against debian-policy as soon as this
email is off.
Reply to: