On Sun, 28 Feb 2010, David Paleino wrote: > I'd like to avoid useless deltas between Debian and Ubuntu, *especially* > regarding available binary packages. However, my opinion is that desktopcouch > is a service available on the user's host (together with couchdb), so a > package needing its functionality should depend on "desktopcouch". > In my opinion, python-desktopcouch should be merged in the aforementioned, > and > maybe python-desktopcouch-records renamed to "desktopcouch-records" -- and > move everything out of PYTHONPATH. I believe those are "private" modules, not > really usable from outside.
Huh? Such a remark led me wondering if you know what you are packaging. python-desktopcouch-records is certainly not a private module. It should be available to all python programs if they wish to store data in a desktopcouch database. Coming back to the topic, the dependency between desktopcouch and -records got added following https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+bug/422179 but Ken Vandine never gave the error message he had. IMO it's this dependency that should not exist and I'm not sure why the service requires it. Maybe the part of -records that is required by desktopcouch should be moved to python-desktopcouch. I also don't see the reason of the split between desktopcouch and python-desktopcouch, they could be merged IMO. > [1] by the way, it would be cool if we maintained the package together in > Debian, and let it naturally flow in Ubuntu :) -- me and Kartik were > planning to form a "Debian DesktopCouch Team", which I would be happy if > it was a "Debian/Ubuntu DesktopCouch Team". +1 on that. Cheers, -- Raphaël Hertzog Like what I do? Sponsor me: http://ouaza.com/wp/2010/01/05/5-years-of-freexian/ My Debian goals: http://ouaza.com/wp/2010/01/09/debian-related-goals-for-2010/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected]
