Re: [Debian Wiki] Update of "Teams/Ruby/RubyInWheezy" by VincentFourmond
On 19/04/11 at 00:12 +0200, Vincent Fourmond wrote:
>
> Hello Lucas,
>
> On 18/04/11 23:17, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> > on rewriting the Debian ruby policy: I don't think that a policy is
> > necessary if we standardize on gem2deb. The RubyInWheezy wiki page is a
> > de-facto documentation of how ruby packaging should be done.
>
> No. For one, the X[SB]-Ruby-* fields are not mentioned, while they are
> definitely important. As you have mentioned in another email, I missed
> one field... simply because there no way to know it is needed !
Strictly speaking, there is. You got an warning that you ignored:
dpkg-gencontrol: warning: package ruby-net-scp: unused substitution
variable ${ruby:Versions}
> For someone like me who didn't follow all the discussions about
> gem2deb, the RubyInWheezy page looks more like a TODO-list for those who
> wrote gem2deb than an easy-to-follow guide on how to transition from old
> policy to new policy.
>
> > Regarding
> > the ruby-poly.html dir on the pkg-ruby website, I've just removed it to
> > avoid any confusion.
>
> Good.
>
> > Regarding the conversion of a simple package, instead of starting from
> > the existing package, I recommend to start from scratch, integrate the
> > whole changelog history, and see what else needs to be done. Feel free
> > to ask me for reviews if you feel it's needed.
>
> Hmmm... That is the way you would do it, but there should be other
> ways to do so. Do you think packagers of libraries that provide Ruby
> bindings, but also python, perl and Java binding will want to restart
> their packaging from scratch ? Having a well-documented path from old to
> new including all the fields necessary and all the caveats is necessary
> if you want the transition to happen.
>
> A template by dh-make-ruby isn't a policy.
gem2deb provides you with a fairly complete starting point. To package
something that can't be packaged by gem2deb alone, I would try to do the
packaging with gem2deb, and then integrate the resulting bits into
the existing package.
What you are asking for is not a policy, it's a howto. I agree that a
step-by-step howto is missing, but it would be easier if someone else
than me would write it after discussing the main points on the list (I'm
of course fine with reviewing it).
- Lucas
Reply to: