Package restructuring for GUI tookit-centered packages (was: Bug#444009: Vim with language plugins (python, ruby, perl, tcl) requires X11.)

[James Vega]

On Tue, Oct 02, 2007 at 08:57:11AM +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 01, 2007 at 07:26:16PM -0400, James Vega wrote:
> > I forgot to include vim-lesstif in here.  Do we want to continue to
> > provide that package modulo the above suggestion of including all
> > language bindings with it?  According to popcon, it's the least
> > popular[0] binary package we generate from the Vim source package, far
> > behind the next least popular[1].
> 
> I would have said "yes", but according to popcon I'm now convinced it is
> no longer that useful. Just drop it.

That brings up the question of whether we want to provide a transitional
package or not.  For all the other packages being dropped, it makes
sense to simply leave them as transitional packages Depending on vim-gtk
since that's essentially what they were.  This doesn't make much sense
for vim-lesstif since that'd be a change in graphical toolkit.

Also, based on this snippet from our rules file

   ifneq ($(DEB_HOST_GNU_SYSTEM),gnu)
           VARIANTS+=vim-tiny
           VARIANTS+=vim-ruby
           VARIANTS+=vim-tcl
           VARIANTS+=vim-gtk
           VARIANTS+=vim-lesstif
           VARIANTS+=vim-perl
           VARIANTS+=vim-python
           VARIANTS+=vim-gnome
           VARIANTS+=vim-full
           VARIANTS+=vim-basic
   else
           VARIANTS+=vim-tiny
           VARIANTS+=vim-ruby
           VARIANTS+=vim-gtk
           VARIANTS+=vim-lesstif
           VARIANTS+=vim-python
           VARIANTS_SKIP+=vim-perl
           VARIANTS_SKIP+=vim-gnome
           VARIANTS_SKIP+=vim-tcl
           VARIANTS_SKIP+=vim-full
           VARIANTS+=vim-basic
   endif

we would only be building vim-basic and vim-tiny in the "else" block
since there appears to be problems with the language support when
$(DEB_HOST_GNU_SYSTEM) == gnu (should this be a contains check instead
of equality?).

When does this even happen?  Is it anything we actually need to worry
about still or is there somewhere I can check on the status of what was
preventing us from building on those architecture(s)?

James
-- 
GPG Key: 1024D/61326D40 2003-09-02 James Vega <jamessan at debian.org>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
Url : http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-vim-maintainers/attachments/20071004/4c3ba48b/attachment.pgp