Michael Olson <[email protected]> writes: > On Mon, Sep 14, 2009 at 12:14 PM, Michael Olson<[email protected]> wrote: >> On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 5:23 AM, Romain Francoise <[email protected]> >> wrote: >>> Well, I wasn't really saying that we should continue this way, >>> merely asking what others think. There are very good reasons for >>> not using Debian's packages (detailed on the wiki), but given the >>> team's apparent lack of manpower, I wonder if going our own way is >>> reasonable... >> >> I gained some motivation to work on emacs packaging again, and am in >> the process of building a proof-of-concept package of emacs23 which >> undoes the Debian removals. Some notes: > > The proof-of-concept package is done, and its documentation works. > I'll try to find time tonight to upload it to the PPA for jaunty and > karmic.
I didn't find the time to look closer at the package yet, but instead of including a 11MB big quilt patch that ships the documentation, other alternatives to this would be: a) reroll the orig.tar.gz with the docs included b) copy them to debian/emacs-docs and copy them around in debian/rules a) is IMO the most elegant, and would be easy to implement if we had the script that creates the orig.tar.gz. If it really isn't included in the debian source package, we could ask Rob if he could share it with us. b) is IMO still better than the quilt patch as it would reduce the size a bit. The docs would however still end up in diff.gz. -- Gruesse/greetings, Reinhard Tartler, KeyID 945348A4 _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~ubuntu-elisp Post to : [email protected] Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~ubuntu-elisp More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
