Hi David,
David Bremner wrote:
> > Please note that I'm not 100% sure if these wildcards would match all
> > relevant packages for now. Looking into the dh_elpa source code again
> > might reveal some better metrics. Maybe also David Bremner (reincluded
> > in Cc) might have some more insight with which packages dh-elpa works
> > and with which it doesn't.
>
> dh-elpa works if you create a separate binary package and name it
> elpa-*. One could interpret the lintian message as suggesting that
> strategy.
Which would counteract FTP Masters' preference of avoiding unnecessary
tiny binary packages to avoid blowing up the package index more than
necessary.
> I'd imaging that wouldn't have a huge impact on the archive in terms
> of number of binary packages created, but I don't have numbers
> offhand.
I disagree here, not by numbers, but generally. dh-elpa having
flexibility issues should be a reason to introduce further tiny binary
packages at all. It should be a reason to fix dh-elpa (IMHO). (Hence
my original as well as this bug report.)
Regards, Axel
--
,''`. | Axel Beckert <a...@debian.org>, https://people.debian.org/~abe/
: :' : | Debian Developer, ftp.ch.debian.org Admin
`. `' | 4096R: 2517 B724 C5F6 CA99 5329 6E61 2FF9 CD59 6126 16B5
`- | 1024D: F067 EA27 26B9 C3FC 1486 202E C09E 1D89 9593 0EDE
