Quoting gregor herrmann (2014-07-02 19:00:44) > On Tue, 01 Jul 2014 13:37:50 +0200, Dominique Dumont wrote: > >> On Thursday 26 June 2014 13:00:52 you wrote: >>> The lib*-perl namespace is (or at least should be) for perl >>> libraries, not for end user binaries. >>> >>> The cme command should live in its own package, >> >> Err, why ? What is the problem you're trying to solve ? >> >> Some people will argue that a new binary package will be created for >> a small script. >> >> What do people on debian-perl think ? Should cme live in its own >> binary package ? > > I'm a bit ambivalent ... > > On one hand, I also think that a separete package for a script which > then depends on on the rest anyway is overkill and bloats the Packages > file and everything.
How does this differ from, say, libtiff-tools or openjpeg-tools? Or do you also feel that those should've been shipped as part of their library packages, were they introduced nowadays? > On the other hand, for non-perl maintainers the information might be > easier to "install cme and then run `cme check dpkg'" than "run `cme > check dpkg', oh, cme is in libconfig-model-perl, and you also need > libconfig-model-dpkg-perl". (If I got the package names right now :)) - Jonas -- * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt * Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website: http://dr.jones.dk/ [x] quote me freely [ ] ask before reusing [ ] keep private
signature.asc
Description: signature
