Le 18/12/2011 14:26, Dominic Hopf a écrit : > Am Samstag, den 17.12.2011, 21:27 -0800 schrieb Matthew Brush: >> Here's a reasonable list of packages that could exist: >> >> geany <- core application >> geany-common <- ? >> geany-dev <- geany.pc and header files >> geany-extras <- geany themes, bindings, tags >> geany-vala <- vala binding >> geany-python <- python binding >> geany-themes <- all theme files from geany-themes >> geany-tags <- all geany tags (slooooooow!) >> geany-tags-c <- C tags only >> geany-tags-python <- Python tags only, and so on... >> ...other tags >> geany-plugins <- all plugins combined >> geany-plugins-common <- ? >> geany-plugin-addons <- Addon plugin only, and so on... >> ...other plugins > > I'd basically say we shouldn't even care about the packages of specific > GNU/Linux distributions upstream and leave the packaging up to the > particular package maintainer. They have to find the right way for their > users to provide as much flexibility as possible for the user when > installing stuff and keeping package maintenance efforts feasible for > them. > > While we're at it and I'm maintaining some stuff on Fedora I can tell > you my personal opinion: I'd put everything I find as a separate > repository upstream [1] in a separate package. In case some packages are > too big or it would make sense, I'd maybe split a package into > sub-packages. > > Note the technical difference between separate packages and sub-packages > as it is the case for example for the geany-plugins-* stuff in Fedora: > geany-plugins is another package than geany, but geany-plugins-$foo is a > sub-package of geany-plugins. There is no installable so-called > meta-package called "geany-plugins" which would install every plugin, > users would just type `yum install geany-plugins-*` to install > everything. > > The situation for Tag files taken from [2] is a bit special, because > they currently are just additional sources for the Geany package in > Fedora and thus installed when you do a `yum install geany`. Users did > not claim yet about a bloated package, they rather provided feedback > that they found this a cool feature. I don't see a reason (yet) why I > should put every tag file in a separate sub-package. I can imagine a > separate package for geany-tags, though. This however will be not easy > to change, since removing the tags files from the Geany package (they > were there since Geany is in Fedora) would significantly change the > behavior of Geany in Fedora and thus maybe only can be done between > different Fedora releases. > > To get back to the topic: A geany-themes package would be easily > possible, not sure yet about the way to package - separate package or > sub-package of geany, but this mainly is a question of package > maintenance in Fedora and the difference will not be even obvious for > the user. I tend to put it in a newly created separate package since the > themes are (or will/would be) provided in a separate repository upstream > and extending the Geany package itself in that amount would need a > re-review for the Geany package in Fedora.
+1, just provide a geany-theme tarball release and leave the packaging choice to the packagers, we don't have to care. > Did I miss something for the Python and Vala stuff (are they there yet?) > or was this just example names? :) There is an experimental Vala biding [1] and I guess geany-python referred to Matthew's python plugin [2]. Regards, Colomban [1] https://gitorious.org/geany-vala-binding [2] https://github.com/codebrainz/geanypy > > Regards, > Dominic > > [1] https://github.com/geany > [2] http://download.geany.org/contrib/tags/ > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Geany mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.uvena.de/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geany _______________________________________________ Geany mailing list [email protected] https://lists.uvena.de/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geany
