[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Question about GNUstep DL2

From: Yavor Doganov
Subject: Re: Question about GNUstep DL2
Date: Thu, 07 Jan 2010 23:12:36 +0200
User-agent: Wanderlust/2.15.5 (Almost Unreal) SEMI/1.14.6 (Maruoka) FLIM/1.14.9 (Gojō) APEL/10.7 Emacs/23.1 (i486-pc-linux-gnu) MULE/6.0 (HANACHIRUSATO)

Matt Rice wrote:
> > Likewise, this should be libeointerface0/libeointerface-dev.  But
> > you didn't mention EOModeler.  Is its place here, too?
> Ahh, yeah I forgot about that library, no EOModeler can go in its own
> libeomodeler

But the goal is to decrease the number of the binary packages as much
as possible...
If EOControl/EOAccess are together, this makes

6 library packages + 2 adaptors + -devtools = 9 packages :-(

If EOModeler is acceptable (from upstream's POV) to be shipped
together with EOInterface, the number is 7 which is more palatable.

> > Perhaps -devtools is most descriptive.  I guess this is the place
> > to include eoutil, gdlgsdoc and gdl2.make, right?
> OK with me, I'm not exactly sure what to do with gdl2.make, but I'm
> kinda guessing that it should go with the headers for
> EOControl/EOAccess,

Right, its place is in libeoaccess-dev.

> > I wonder why they're developed as frameworks

> [snip]

Thanks for the explanation.

> > Is it safe to remove the symlinks for them in /usr/lib?
> *shrug*, probably


> > One more question...  Isn't at least one adaptor necessary to be
> > present on the system?  Or is it optional -- i.e. neither can be
> > installed, either, or both?
> either or both, is the recommendation, you could potentially get some
> use out of neither if you were using a 3rd party adaptor, but for a
> usable installation i would recommend either or both.

So this is a hard dependency then; thanks.

> Not really, most of the software using gdl2 is non-free, there is
> GSWeb as you say,

But GSWeb is not useful on its own, so packaging it would have the
same issue as gnustep-dl2...

What about OGO/SOGo?  IIRC they maintained their own fork of
gnustep-dl2, or maybe it was not a fork but a different
implementation?  (Not that we have the manpower to maintain a big
thing like SOGo, but still...)

> I have some stuff like a GSWeb based music player, which uses gdl2
> for the ratings and what not, and an IRC bot which uses gdl2, but
> nothing which I would qualify as stable, useful, and worth packaging
> now.

I hope you can finish at least one of these projects some day.

> So whether debian packages it or not because of the lack of free
> software using it is up to you guys,

Well, it won't be rejected by the ftpmasters because of this, but most
probably Federico would have to persuade the prospective sponsor for
the benefit of the package split.

> just IMHO packaging and making EOAccess/EOControl
> private is not going to be very useful.

Yes, I'm already convinced about this.  So the only remaining question
is about EOModeler.

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]