Re: cups-filters 1.0.44 and binary package splitting for mobile
On 01/17/2014 07:02 PM, Didier 'OdyX' Raboud wrote:
> Hi Till,
>
> Le vendredi, 17 janvier 2014, 13.19:06 Till Kamppeter a écrit :
>> I have released cups-filters 1.0.44 upstream and updated the Debian
>> GIT repo appropriately.
>
> Nice, thanks.
>
>> In addition, I have split two binary packages to allow a low-footprint
>> printing stack on mobile devices, the "level 2" on
>>
>> https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/client-1305-printing-sta
>> ck-with-mobile-in-mind
>
> I would really have appreciated a public discussion here on debian-
> printing@l.d.o before seeing extensive split patches applied on the
> packaging repository, which just make me feel like an uploading-monkey
> for Ubuntu purposes now; mind you, these are also Debian packages. This
> earlier discussion would have opened options about binary package names,
> etc.
>
> That said, I don't disagree with the general goal, or with the split,
> but really, if you want to maintain cups and cups-filters "in Debian
> first" (which is great, I absolutely welcome that, it reduces the
> workload for everyone), then you also need to do it the "Debian way",
> which implies discussion with or within the concerned package
> maintainers _before_ doing extensive changes.
>
>> Now, by installing avahi-daemon, cups-daemon, cups-ppd-less,
>> cups-browsed, cups-filters-ppd-less, poppler-utils, and the libraries
>> pulled in by these one gets a printing stack in the order of two-digit
>> megabytes, without the bulk of drivers and PPD files.
>
> In particular, I find the -ppd-less postfix absolutely awful; in english
> it would (as far as my l10n-en skills go) stand as "-ppdless" anyway.
> Also, it describes what it doesn't do, rather than describing what it
> does. Something like -coreprotocols, -core, -minimal, -direct or even
> -ppdless would sound way better. My personal preference would go for
> "-direct", but let's discuss!
>
>> OdyX, the changes are in the Debian GIT repos of CUPS and cups-filters
>> now. Can you upload the packages to Debian so that they sync into
>> Ubuntu? Can you also check whether I did the splitting correctly?
>
> Besides the naming issue above:
>
> * Replaces and Breaks need to be "<<" the version that is uploaded, aka
> 1.0.44-1, not "<=" the latest uploaded version. People out there could
> have rebuilt cups-filters without the split; see Debian Policy §7.6.1.
> * You have created new changelog entries without replicating earlier
> changes (some of which fix bugs, which come automagically with git-dch
> --meta).
> I have certainly already mentionned this to you; I prefer to generate
> (+ hand-edit) changelog entries using git-dch at release time (this
> makes backporting, reverting, etc easier). So if you don't stick to
> this, please at least make sure to replicate my changelog entries)
>
> I will fix the two above problems and upload as soon as we can find an
> agreement on a nicer postfix than -ppd-less (and when cups 1.7.1-2 will
> have migrated to testing).
Sorry for simply committing it this way.
For the debian/changelog I was also wondering why there were changes in
"git log" which are not represented by the debian/changelog. I do not
know how they got lost in my copy of the repo (or how they did not make
it into it).
For the name for the new binary packages I am also a little bit in
doubt, -minimal is also not good as there is the smaller level-1
configuration of no drivers/filters at all. The new packages are for a
configuration with a minimum support for directly talking to printers.
As filters for PDF, PostScript, PWG Raster, and PCL are also certain
printer drivers perhaps we should say something like -basic-drivers?
Till
Reply to: