Hi,
a proposition for the perl policy has been made by Andrew Pimlott.
I've attached his mail ...
I don't know what to think about it. I'm not much in favor of it
because it seems obvious that a perl module which is about treating email
could be in section mail. The other way of thinking is it's a perl module
so it's useful with the perl interpreter, it must be in section
interpreter is quite logical too.
I wouldn't impose anything but maybe other people have other ideas ? What
do people think about it ? :)
Cheers,
--
Hertzog Raphaël >> 0C4CABF1 >> http://prope.insa-lyon.fr/~rhertzog/
--- Begin Message ---
I noticed during the sudden influx of perl package updates that some perl
libraries are not in the section "interpreters". Then I noticed that the
new perl policy doesn't say anything about which section perl libraries
should be in. Then I noticed that sections in general are simply left to
the discretion of the packager.
That's fine as far as the whole distribution goes--completely specifying
what goes into each section would be endlessly tedious. But I wonder
whether for perl packages we should impose a bit more order. I'd like to
know that I can restrict myself to "interpreters" when looking for perl
libraries.
Would you consider adding this to your perl policy?
Thanks,
Andrew
(I am not a developer or on the debian-perl list. Feel free to forword any
of my thoughts, however.)
--- End Message ---
