On 17-02-17 01:29:36, Alex Kost wrote: > Mekeor Melire (2017-02-16 18:01 +0100) wrote: > > > zathura is a document viewer: > > > > synopsis: Lightweight keyboard-driven PDF viewer > > description: Zathura is a customizable document viewer. It > > provides a minimalistic interface and an interface that mainly focuses > > on keyboard interaction. > > > > Meanwhile, when you only install zathura itself, it's not usable for any > > format. You have to install zathura-pdf-poppler in order to be able to > > open PDF files. > > > > So, shouldn't zathura depend on zathura-pdf-poppler so that PDFs are > > viewable by default? > > > > On IRC, we agreed that zathura should depend on zathura-pdf-poppler: > > > > <mekeor> i just installed 'zathura', a PDF viewer. it doesn't > > work. i get this error first: "could not open plugin directory". can > > anyone reproduce this? > > <mekeor> oh, i think i have to additionally install another package. > > <mekeor> zathura-pdf-poppler > > <lfam> mekeor: If that's the cause, we should fix it! > > <mekeor> lfam: yes, it was the cause. > > <mekeor> lfam: there are several different backends for > > zathura. it's imaginable that a person wants to install zathura without > > PDF support but only postscript support, isn't it? > > <lfam> mekeor: It's imaginable, but we generally intend to provide > > fully featured packages > > zathura is already a fully-featured package; it just happens that it > doesn't include any plugin, so it's not usable by default. But it's an > upstream choice. So I think we shouldn't modify zathura package. > > > <Sleep_Walker> question is - is there anyone who would like to > > have zathura and not zathura-pdf-poppler? > > <Sleep_Walker> and I agree that it is unlikely > > <Sleep_Walker> that is moment where weaker dependency like 'recommends' > > would come handy > > > > If you have a different opinion, let me know. Otherwise, I'm going to > > send a patch next week which implements this dependency. > > I have a different opinion. I think since 'zathura' and its plugins are > separate projects, they should stay independent packages, and > 'zathura-pdf-poppler' shouldn't be propagated when 'zathura' is > installed, especially taking into account that there is > 'zathura-pdf-mupdf' (which is not packaged). > > Also what if a user doesn't want to view PDFs at all? Well, it's > unlikely, but still. There might be users who like djvu and don't like > pdf, why not. > > And the same logic should be applied to 'aspell'. It's not usable by > itself, you need to install some dictionary. So what about installing > 'aspell-dict-en' by default along with 'aspell'? To be clear I'm > against this and against modifying 'zathura' package. > > But I think it would be good to update the description to mention that a > user should also install 'zathura-*' plugins to make it work. > > -- > Alex > > >
I agree, the packages are good as they are, what must be improved in this case is the description of the root package (zathura). -- ng0 -- https://www.inventati.org/patternsinthechaos/
