On 09/05/11 00:32, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
I must ask something else: we usually do not package libraries unless we will also have binary packages that depend on them, or they have a _large_ userbase outside of the distro. Do any of those conditions apply?
Most likely none of those apply. However, I believe there are still good reasons to include it.
A high-quality parallel RNG library will be very useful for researchers like myself that develop special purpose applications that don't have any use for wide audiences, e.g. Monte Carlo simulations within physics, math/statistics, biology and finance (++).
General purpose binary applications as may be included in Debian that use random numbers usually don't required a very high quality of RNG, unless they are some kind of mathematical application.
Therefore there won't be a lot of general purpose applications that depend on such a library. In that way I think this kind of library should be considered excempt from such "dependency considerations" :-)
My motivation for including it is to improve Debian as a platform for numerical research work. I don't know how large the user base is for this library.
Also, nowadays the number of multi-core computers is rising dramatically. More and more mathematical software that includes random number generation will need to include proper parallel RNG algorithms.
Anyway, if I change the package name, would I need to report a second ITP with a different package name, or can an upload of a renamed package close this particular ITP?No need to file a second ITP or retitle the ITP bug.
Well, I already did it and reported an ITP for 'tinarng' (#626087), so this is really closed... :-) I don't mind communicating here, though.
Best regards Torquil Sørensen