On Thursday, Aug 21, 2003, at 04:25 America/New_York, guenter geiger wrote:
On Wed, 20 Aug 2003, Pablo wrote:
hi Guenter!
I wrote to Yves to find more about putting his externals into cvs and about compiling pidip w/o support for liblame.
About having one or several source packages i'm not very sure.. it's clear we need that for small externals, but for the big ones it could be a bit annoying, also i don't like the versioning scheme you are using... for example your debian package for pdp has version 00.20030718-5 while it'd be much nicer if it said 0.9 as that's the version for pdp.
Exactly. Thats why I want the big packages that do "something else" as separate source packages, thats the only way to do proper versioning.
The plan is to have one "pd-externals" package, which will hold all the small externals, and make additional modules for the others.
currently this would be:
- pdp
- flext (together with the externals written with flext)
- zexy
- cyclone
- unauthorized (just saw that they are in there)
The best would be to move all the other deeper into the hierarchy:
externals\ \externals \flext.. (with footils ..) \pdp (with pidip .. ?) \miXed \unauthorized \zexy
I would support this structure as long as all of the dependencies are sure to work on all of the various debian platforms. I think that the original idea makes sense when considering all of the platforms that Debian runs on (having pd-externals be a package of all externals that don't have dependencies beyond libc, and other externals with more dependencies would be grouped into other packages). Otherwise, someone on a less popular platform could be prevented from easily using all of the externals if one dep is missing.
.hc