On Fri, 9 Jan 2009 16:57:38 +0100, Michael Hanke wrote: > On Fri, Jan 09, 2009 at 04:43:08PM +0100, David Paleino wrote: > > On Fri, 9 Jan 2009 16:24:46 +0100, Michael Hanke wrote: > > > * What other application would these libraries use? > > > > > > I really think that these are intended for development _inside_ ODIN > > > and the result is a simulation _inside_ ODIN and not a standalone tool > > > linked against some lib that could be packaged on its own. I simply > > > see no advantage of packaging them as shared libs -- believe me, > > > shared library packaging is nothing you should start without need. > > > > And what if $random_developer wants to #include <odin/foo.h> in his app? > > Must he be forced to install the whole odin thing? He just installs the lib* > > packages -- even if those are meant as private libraries. > > Sure. The other half of the topic is: Someone has to check each upstream > release whether upstream was correct in bumping or not bumping SO > version, negotiating with upstream to correct (if necessary), changing > package names accordingly, forcing the package through NEW, ... > > Significant increase in workload for a number of people due to 'what if > a random...' What's wrong in: > > Probably upstream should be educated on a better usage of this, [..] ? :) Maybe I'm just too confident in upstream's education? > > > Moreover, the cpp are the actual templates that are used to develop own > > > sequences -- IMHO this is more than plain documentation. Just take a > > > look at the actual user interface. > > > > Yes, I already started the GUI before sending my first mail. > > > > And, IMHO, they're still documentative: you're "allowed" to write a sequence > > from scratch, aren't you? (Ok, probably you wouldn't do that, but still can) > > > > Those are, as Andreas pointed, "example sequences" -- they are best fit in > > /usr/share/doc/<something>/examples/ IMHO. > > As I said -- that is my oppinion, but since you package -- you decide. I don't really like this kind of replies, I'm one who always tries to find a common ground. What if we add the -doc package to odin's Recommends:, and provide symlinks in /usr/share/odin/ ? Also, I'm thinking of adding a README.Debian with the information from http://od1n.sourceforge.net/sequences.html , and a debian/NEWS (which should pop up upon installation) informing users to read in /usr/share/doc/.../ how to use the templates. The idea of debian/NEWS is not bad at all IMHO: we could warn users "Hey, if you want templates, install odin-doc" > > (/me thinks you're getting kinda upset for nothing) > > Not at all -- just sharing my thoughts. I can be quiet if you like ;-) No, sorry, just a misunderstanding. > It is just that ODIN is not a random application like e.g. an editor and > it is probably worth discussing things before the become concrete, right? Right -- and that's why a posted a RFC, instead of doing the package and injecting it. No? ;) David -- . ''`. Debian maintainer | http://wiki.debian.org/DavidPaleino : :' : Linuxer #334216 --|-- http://www.hanskalabs.net/ `. `'` GPG: 1392B174 ----|---- http://snipr.com/qa_page `- 2BAB C625 4E66 E7B8 450A C3E1 E6AA 9017 1392 B174
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature