Bug#549121: libslv2-9: abusive Recommends

[Jonas Smedegaard]

Hi Fabian (and everyone else),

On Wed, Mar 10, 2010 at 02:15:05PM +0100, Fabian Greffrath wrote:
>Am 10.03.2010 13:44, schrieb Jonas Smedegaard:
>>Is it ok that I get more involved: switch from abbrev. dh7 to CDBS and 
>>then (obviously) release?

>I appreciate your work on CDBS (I use it myself for some package) and I 
>respect that you as a CDBS-developer like it most, but is switching to 
>using CDBS really a requirement for you to get involved in helping with 
>a package?

Good question!

That is how I choose to invest my time currently, yes.

An issue that I feel quite strongly about it packages badly *maintained* 
(i.e. included into Debian but after that not looked after properly).

Like many others, I would like to work on far more than I can 
realistically find time to not only do once but also sustain - i.e. to 
properly *maintain*.  Which is why I have chosen this stubborn approach 
of only caring at all for packages that I alsp "make comfortable" for 
long-term maintainance.


CDBS is not a beginners' tool[1], so I do realize that it raises the bar 
of working with packages using it.  On the other hand it is quite 
effective to streamline applying features like copyright tracking across 
many many packages.

I certainly respect anyone not wanting "their" package "contaminated" 
with CDBS.


Kind regards,

  - Jonas


[1] the "problem" with CDBS as compared to short-form dh7 is that it 
actually requires you to understand the language of the debian/rules 
file: make.  On the other hand I do claim that when understanding the 
make language, CDBS unlike debhelper do not really *hide* functionality, 
only stuffs it away.

I consider debhelper a great tool for atomic packaging tasks, but am 
worried of the short-form variant reinventing the wheel of make in Perl!

-- 
* Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt
* Tlf.: +45 40843136  Website: http://dr.jones.dk/

  [x] quote me freely  [ ] ask before reusing  [ ] keep private
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-multimedia-maintainers/attachments/20100310/ce18e8f3/attachment-0001.pgp>