On Mon, 9 Jul 2007, LaMont Jones wrote: > On Mon, Jul 09, 2007 at 01:40:01PM +0200, Santiago Vila wrote: > > > Can you please at least move cvs to Recommends of gettext and > > > mention autopoint and it's cvs dependency in the description of > > > gettext before closing this bug? > > Can the submitter please tell me what problem, exactly, are we trying > > to solve by doing that? > > if a package is silly enough to build-depend on gettext, and regenerate > it's auto* files including an invocation of autopoint, then it needs to > know to build-depend cvs (which would be a, um, policy violation).
It's documented that you should add cvs to the build-depends field if you need autopoint. If a package is silly enough not to do so, we would know immediately, as the autobuilders would not be able to build it. So where is the problem? Basically, there are only two other things that we could do: * A package who contains just autopoint. There would not be any gain in doing this, as packages would have to build-depends: autopoint instead of the current build-depends: cvs. Moreover, people expect autopoint to be in the gettext package. * Make gettext to depend on cvs. This would be bad, because it would force cvs on a lot of people who do not needed, as explained in README.Debian. The current status is a compromise. Need autopoint? Add cvs to build-depends. It's simple, it's documented, it's easy to follow, and it's not worse than the alternatives. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
