Re: Working on debian developer's reference and "best packaging practices"
On Thu, May 02, 2002 at 03:20:45PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> >>"Julian" == Julian Gilbey <J.D.Gilbey@qmul.ac.uk> writes:
> Julian> On Thu, May 02, 2002 at 02:30:34PM +0200, Wichert Akkerman wrote:
> >> Refer to a dpkg reference instead and document extra restrictions
> Julian> Surely either everything necessary should be in the dpkg reference or
> Julian> everything necessary should be in policy. q
> Umm, no. It does not make sense to restrict dpkg authors to a
> static, slow changing mechanism that is policy as the blueprint for
> their software development. The dpkg authors must be free to
> innovate, and document additional features, and evolving behaviour.
> On the other hand, all packages must not be left to the whimsy
> of the dpkg developers either; since potentially large numbers of
> packages would be impacted by such changes.
> Going to either extreme is suboptimal.
> What we need to do is specify a minimal set of interfaces that
> all packages are required to provide, and that the dpkg authors must
> maintain compatibility for.
> Changes to this core functionality would require a transition
> plan to effect, but otherwise dpkg authors are free to make changes
> and extentions. Most extentions, when the become popular, would be
> candidates for inclution into the core interface, when the dpkg
> authors feel the interface has stabilized and would be unlikely to
But we must then be very careful about how the splitting of
information works and how the two are kept compatible.
Julian Gilbey, Dept of Maths, Queen Mary, Univ. of London
Debian GNU/Linux Developer, see: http://people.debian.org/~jdg/
Visit http://www.thehungersite.com/ to help feed the hungry
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to email@example.com
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact firstname.lastname@example.org