Re: Glom for Ubuntu Intrepid

[Iain Lane <laney ubuntu com>]

On 6 Jan 2009, at 07:56, Murray Cumming wrote:

> On Mon, 2009-01-05 at 21:59 +0000, Iain Lane wrote:
> > Iain Lane wrote:
> > > I'm not sure if I pushed the fixed version to my PPA, as I was  
> > > preparing
> > > for a real upload. I'll make sure to fix it on the PPA tonight.  
> > > Sorry
> > > for not receiving these mails before! I only found out about the  
> > > issue
> > > from reading the changelog on SVN, whoops.
> > >
> > > For completeness, there was a rogue line in the rule file to build  
> > > the
> > > .deb which read something like `rm -r /path/to/examples'. I don't  
> > > know
> > > why the original packager put it there (FHS/Debian policy compliance
> > > maybe? On Debian examples are supposed to be installed in
> > > /usr/share/doc/package/examples, but they generally aren't directly
> > > referenced by the program. Perhaps calling these "templates" would  
> > > be
> > > better?), but I removed it and now they appear.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Iain
> >
> > I uploaded ~ppa10 a little while ago. The examples and  
> > documentation are
> > now split out into a separate glom-doc package,
>
> That's not really acceptable to me. The templates/examples are an
> important part of Glom and should always be present.

Quoting policy:

"Recommends
This declares a strong, but not absolute, dependency.

The Recommends field should list packages that would be found together  
with this one in all but unusual installations. "

Sounds right to me? The user would be expected to have them installed,  
sure, but the program still functions without them. Same as with the  
manual. They *will* still be installed by default for anyone  
installing glom, so functionally there's no difference, save that a  
user who explicitly wishes to remove these files may now do so. (by  
the way, the motivation for this [and presumably other] -doc packages  
is to split arch-independent files in /usr/share/ out into an arch- 
indep package which saves space and bandwidth for the mirrors).

Iain

This message has been checked for viruses but the contents of an attachment
may still contain software viruses, which could damage your computer system:
you are advised to perform your own checks. Email communications with the
University of Nottingham may be monitored as permitted by UK legislation.