On 31/10/11 14:56, Rimas Kudelis wrote: > I may be wrong about it, but in my opinion, there was no reason to > separate imageshack-uploader-common package from imageshack-uploader. > The latter depends on the former, and I seriously doubt that anyone > would want imageshack-uploader-common without imageshack-uploader. I > suggest to merge these packages into one. > > Again, I may be wrong, so feel free to close it as invalid if I am wrong.
ISTR that the amount of common files was of a non-trivial size, and that to have a arch:all common package would save a bit of disk space on the servers. I checked, and this isn't the case. I'll probably merge these in my next upload. -- Luke Faraone;; Debian & Ubuntu Developer; Sugar Labs, Systems lfaraone on irc.[freenode,oftc].net -- http://luke.faraone.cc PGP fprint: 5189 2A7D 16D0 49BB 046B DC77 9732 5DD8 F9FD D506
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
