On Tue, Dec 01, 2009 at 11:31:27AM +0100, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote: > Hi all, I'll reply as a (not very active) devscripts maintainer. > > On Mon, Nov 30, 2009 at 08:10:31PM +0100, Patrick Schoenfeld wrote: > > In my POV the ideal situation would be: > > - debian-goodies contains scripts which are useful for users and > > developers comparably > > - devscripts contains scripts mostly related to development > > - devscripts could depend on debian-goodies if it uses tools from it, > > but preferable not the other way round. > > I generally agree with this POV. Just to be a bit more precise and sure > we all agree with the principles: with "developer" here we mean "Debian > developer".
Agreed. > > Just on a side note: I'm never sure if debian-goodies is a good name, > > because before I was told about it I never stumbled about it and for > > such a name I would never have searched. > > It's a historical name a bit hard to change now, but surely we can > transition to a better name if we find one. The best guess that comes to > my mind is "debianutils", but is already taken (by an Essential) package > ... how about debianutils-extra? On the other hand, there is a pattern of using that suffix for packages which provide additional functionality related to the prefix. $ grep-available -sPackage -FPackage -- -goodies Package: emacs-goodies-el Package: aewm++-goodies Package: xfce4-goodies Package: debian-goodies Package: addresses-goodies-for-gnustep > > And another side note to the other devscripts maintainers: Maybe > > we should invite Raphael to join our team? ;) Personally, I had never extended the invite simply because I expect that people will ask to join if they feel they have the time and desire to join. I'd certainly welcome Raphael as he's done plenty of work providing useful patches in the past. -- James GPG Key: 1024D/61326D40 2003-09-02 James Vega <[email protected]>
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
