Alessio Treglia writes (Re: New virtual packages: lv2-plugin and lv2-host):
On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 2:27 PM, Ian Jackson
ijack...@chiark.greenend.org.uk wrote:
And an lv2-host could include something which can use only plugins
with certain features.
Altough dillo doesn't support
Quoting Ian Jackson (2012-11-21 13:40:35)
Alessio Treglia writes (Re: New virtual packages: lv2-plugin and lv2-host):
On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 2:27 PM, Ian Jackson
ijack...@chiark.greenend.org.uk wrote:
And an lv2-host could include something which can use only plugins
with certain
Jonas Smedegaard writes (Re: New virtual packages: lv2-plugin and lv2-host):
It seems to me that you are applying more strict rules now than has been
applied to other names on the list in the past.
This is not some kind of hazing ritual where people have to persuade a
reluctant audience. I'm
On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 12:40 PM, Ian Jackson
ijack...@chiark.greenend.org.uk wrote:
I guess you are thinking that LV2 plugin packages would Recommend or
Depend on lv2-host ?
Yes, exactly.
But I don't think that's really helpful.
Perhaps lv2-host should specify something more definite, like
Why tightening up rules? Policy =C2=A73.6 does not pretend packages
to meet= any specs nor comply with common interfaces, it just says
Sometimes there are severa= l packages which offer more-or-less the
same functionality. In this case, it'= s useful to define a virtual
package whose name
On 21 November 2012 22:51, Alessio Treglia ales...@debian.org wrote:
Actually I receive lots of mails from users asking me questions like How
could
I find an exhaustive list of LV2 toys currently provided by Debian?, Does
the
X sequencer support LV2 plugins?. So, I think we'd do a good
On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 3:03 PM, Ian Jackson
ijack...@chiark.greenend.org.uk wrote:
So I'm afraid I still don't understand how this virtual package would
help improve the dependency resolution.
Although I'd agree that defining a new lv2-plugin would not be needed,
making LV2 plugins packages
Alessio Treglia writes (Re: New virtual packages: lv2-plugin and lv2-host):
On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 3:03 PM, Ian Jackson
ijack...@chiark.greenend.org.uk wrote:
So I'm afraid I still don't understand how this virtual package would
help improve the dependency resolution.
Although I'd agree
Jonas Smedegaard d...@jones.dk writes:
It seems to me that you are applying more strict rules now than has been
applied to other names on the list in the past.
I don't know if Ian is, but I certainly would. We have a bunch of
existing virtual packages that aren't really useful because they
Alessio Treglia ales...@debian.org writes:
Why tightening up rules? Policy §3.6 does not pretend packages to meet
any specs nor comply with common interfaces, it just says Sometimes
there are several packages which offer more-or-less the same
functionality. In this case, it's useful to define
On 21/11/12 17:27, Russ Allbery wrote:
Without that, it's questionable whether the
virtual package serves any purpose, and indeed you'll find that the CD
ripping packages in Debian don't reference mp3-encoder
... and perhaps more tellingly, only one package Provides it, and that
package isn't
On 21 Nov 2012, at 17:27, Russ Allbery r...@debian.org wrote:
don't know if Ian is, but I certainly would. We have a bunch of
existing virtual packages that aren't really useful because they don't
offer any sort of guaranteed interface, and therefore cannot be
meaningfully used in package
Le 21/11/2012 17:48, Ian Jackson a écrit :
Although I'd agree that defining a new lv2-plugin would not be needed,
making LV2 plugins packages Depend/Recommend a generic lv2-host
package would seriously help as it allows maintainers to avoid to fill
up Depends: fields with long and incomplete
Alessio Treglia writes (New virtual packages: lv2-plugin and lv2-host):
virtual-package-list.txt.gz [1] says:
1. Post to debian-devel saying what names you intend to use or what
other changes you wish to make, and file a wish list bug against the
package debian-policy.
So,
Hi Ian,
thanks for the quick reply!
On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 2:27 PM, Ian Jackson
ijack...@chiark.greenend.org.uk wrote:
An lv2-plugin could be almost anything AFAICT, so depending on some
LV2 plugin is not very useful.
And an lv2-host could include something which can use only plugins
with
15 matches
Mail list logo
