Stefano Zacchiroli <zack@debian.org> (21/10/2007): > Re-reading that thread it seems to me you acknowledged at that time > that putting everything in libgraphvizN-dev would add a dependency on > ocaml which should then be fulfilled by everyone installing > libgraphvizN-dev. This seems an issue to me. Sure. I forget to mention that Julien and me came to the conclusion that having only a Suggests: on the ocaml part for this libgraphvizN-dev package would be acceptable, since its primary goal is to build C stuff against graphviz, and a secondary goal is to provide the OCaml development files. Putting a sentence about that in the long description would probably dissipate any doubt in users' mind. > If you agree on that we can make a deal :) of creating just one > libgraphviz-ocaml-dev package with both the -dev and runtime stuff for > ocaml and maybe have it provide libgraphviz-ocaml so that at least at > a virtual package level we are consistent with the other ocaml > packages. What do you think of it? That would be another option if you don't second the idea described above which satisfied Julien & me. :) Thanks again for your time. I'm sorry it's so lengthy but OCaml sounds a bit weird to me. :) Cheers, -- Cyril
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature