On Thu, Aug 23, 2007 at 10:07:19PM -0400, Ethan wrote: > I'm not sure if this is the right place for this kind of question or not, but > I > thought I'd ask and see if I got flamed :)
Don't worry :) > 1) I see that there are tags works-with-format::zip, but not > works-with-format::gzip. I'm not sure exactly how useful something like that > would be, or how many formats tags ought to be created for.. I think there's no works-with-format::gzip because it's so widely supported that I have trouble seeing a use case for someone looking for "something that can handle gzips": almost everything can. There is however more than a use case for looking for programs that can unpack a .zip file. At least, this would be the rationale, but I can of course be missing something. > 2) I'm trying to tag libcompress-raw-zlib-perl, which is a low-level interface > to the zlib library that isn't used by anything except other, higher-level > Perl > zlib libraries. I would say the average user is going to think of it as a > role::shared-lib, because even if they develop software, they'd probably look > for a higher-level zlib library (libiocompress-zlib-perl, > libcompress-zlib-perl). On the other hand, they might want to use it as a > role::devel-lib if they're developing for some weird situation where the > lower-level interface is better (embedded systems.. that use Perl? Not sure). > For now I tagged it role::devel-lib, but I thought it would be helpful to > explain why this was a hard decision for me and ask. DebTaggingGuidelines says > that role::devel-lib is any "code library that can be used by developers" > [emphasis mine], but edit-help says "What does the package look like from this > point of view?" I understand your point. Maybe we need something to encode a concept like "the maintainer believe this package is not to be used directly, but instead as a runtime support for more high-level libraries", but I can't think of any straightforward way of doing that. I'd say, happily go with role::devel-lib and leave it to the users to decide if they need it or not. In fact, you can take advantage of the package description and add a note telling them that they most likely don't, unless in very few specific cases. Ciao, Enrico -- GPG key: 1024D/797EBFAB 2000-12-05 Enrico Zini <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ Debtags-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/debtags-devel
