David Moreno Garza wrote: >On Thu, 2005-03-24 at 17:31 +0000, Henning Makholm wrote: > > >>Scripsit David Moreno Garza <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> >> >> >>>Revolution is a little Ruby binding to the excellent Evolution email >>>client. >>> >>> >>Is it so little that it would be better to include it with the >>evolution package? >> >> > >Not quite sure since: > >a) evolution, IMHO, doesn't need to depend on ruby. >b) It is a 3rd-party software, not included officially by Novell. >c) It is a ruby module itself, just as other several hundreds. > >But if evolution's maintainer thinks it could be a good idea (I don't), >we can implement it in the near future, yes. > >
With regards to a), I don't think you need to depend on ruby at all. The reason is that the ruby bindings are only available for programs running in a ruby interpreter (AFAIK). Thus, if you want to *use* the ruby bindings, you then install ruby. If you do not install ruby, you do not need or use the ruby bindings. For example, if you package a libfoo package that is a C library, and libfoo-dev contains the static part of the C library, then there is no need to have libfoo-dev depend on the C compiler. Anyone that *uses* the libfoo-dev library will need to install a C compiler regardless. Thus, libevelution-ruby doesn't need to depend on Ruby. It only needs to depend on evolution. - Adam PS. It may need build depend on ruby, rake, etc.. , but that is different. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]