Re: Boot-Floppies: task-python packages
Adam Di Carlo <adam@onshore.com> writes:
> David Coe <david@someotherplace.org> writes:
>
> > [*Q1*: Should this overview be included in each of the task-python-* package
> > descriptions? Just task-python? Nowhere?]
>
> I dunno.. in the individual descriptions. You could have all this in
> a /usr/share/doc/task-*/README .
Hmmm, yes, I'll put it in the READMEs, but at package-selection time
that doesn't help.
So my current plan is to include that overview in the task-python
description, and have the other task-python-* descriptions say "see
task-python for more details."
> > task-python-full write complex Python applications and/or have
> > available all the Debian-packaged Python extensions
>
> I would think this would be task-python-dev
>
> > task-python-dev write Python extensions in other programming languages
>
> I would think this would merge with the above.
>
> Remember, less is more.
Thanks, yes, your suggestion fits better with the way the other
language-specific task- packages are organized. And it'll be easier
to maintain over time. I'll do it that way.
> > (Note that you needn't install any of these to be able to use
> > other packages that are written in Python; the required pieces
> > will be automatically installed along with the packages that need
> > them.)
> > .
> > (You may later remove these task-* packages without losing
> > anything else.)
> >
> > [*Q2*: are the above parenthetical explanations unnecessary?]
>
> Perhaps.... they don't hurt.
OK, I'll leave them, but only in task-python.
> > [*Q3*: is task-python-apps a ridiculous concept?]
>
> I think so.
Me too. I'll remove it; anybody who legitimately cares to create a
list of python-using apps will know how to grep through the available
file, I suspect.
> Looks okay to me, though I'm not a python hacker (unfortunately).
Thanks for your comments; you've helped me a lot.
Reply to: