On Mon, Oct 19, 2015 at 2:34 PM, Antonio Terceiro <[email protected]> wrote: > On Sun, Oct 18, 2015 at 11:22:23PM +0200, Cédric Boutillier wrote: >> On Sun, Oct 18, 2015 at 01:50:12PM +0200, Per Andersson wrote: >> > On Sun, Oct 18, 2015 at 6:22 AM, Abhijith PA <[email protected]> >> > wrote: >> > > Hi >> > > >> > > Ruby-launchy is a dependency for ruby-letter-opener. Seems like it has a >> > > repo in pkg-ruby-extras , but not uploaded to the archive.Mailed the >> > > maintainer, and no reply yet.It will be nice if some DD from here can >> > > take care of this.? >> > >> > Are there lots of depends on ruby-launchy? Otherwise it might be easier >> > to just use xdg-open, since most packages, from what I've seen, only use >> > it to launch something in a web browser. (I saw in the ITP that Jekyll >> > depends on it.) >> >> I think that only one or two packages in the archive so far depend >> (upstream) on ruby-launchy, and they have been patched to use xdg-open. >> It is currently used only to open a browser in a platform independent >> manner. > > At the moment that is *everything* that launchy supports, i.e. its _only > feature_ is opening a browser. ;-) > >> Since we control pretty much the environment of systems where >> our packages are installed, I don't think it is much necessary, and >> would prefer the use of more standard tools, like xdg-open. > > OTOH we have to patch N packages that rely on launchy. I'm not sure > where to draw the line, i.e. which value of N is too large that it would > be easier to just bite the bullet and actually have launchy in Debian.
Maybe this is a topic for the meeting? :-) Maybe if N >= 2 it makes sense to just upload and forget (err, I mean do other things than discuss if/when to upload super small packages). -- Per
