[Pkg-crosswire-devel] Module dependencies

[Norbert Bollow]

Matthew Talbert <ransom1982 at gmail.com> wrote:

> > [Aside for techies: this is like all MTAs doing Provides:
> > mail-transport-agent and then mail clients like mutt do Recommends:
> > mail-transport-agent rather than Depends: sendmail or whatever].
> >
> > There *are* some wrinkles with this (because package managers handle
> > fulfilling virtual dependencies in sometimes unexpected ways) that need
> > to be understood, I am fully aware of that -- which is why mutt does
> > Recommends: exim4 | mail-transport-agent -- but we can deal with that.
> > We might (for example) need to end up doing something like Recommends:
> > sword-kjv | sword-text to help package managers make a sane default
> > choice if the user fails to select a bible module themselves.
> >
> > Further, by using Recommends: rather than Depends: we avoid any
> > appearance of "forcing" anything.
> 
> I think Recommends would be more appropriate.

Actually I believe that it should be "Suggests:" rather than
"Recommends:".

"Recommends:" can (depending on the package manager program and
its configuration) lead to not-explicitly-requested automated
installation, which is IMO not a good idea at all for the common
use-case of people using e.g. GnomeSword on a single-user PC
without any sysadmin besides themselves.

(I don't really know how native speakers of English feel about
the KJV, but from my perspective, automatically installing the
KJV by default is not a friendly thing to do.)

> It would be my preference that we save the discussion about whether we
> should or shouldn't package modules until after this release.

I don't think that that's going to work, since there are module
packages out there, and the new sword package needs to deal with
them somehow.  Options include:
a) force those module packages to be removed from the system
b) force them to be upgraded to new versions (which we'd have to
   package)
c) make sure that the new sword package works with old module
   packages

> It would also my preference that no additional modules would be added.

Regardless of whether we (the people who are here on this list
working on improving Ubuntu+Debian packaging for CrossWire stuff)
decide to build module packages, I'm sure that sooner or later a
need will arise that will lead to such packages being created and
distributed, if not via the official Ubuntu+Debian repositories then
further downstream.

In my opinion, it is wise to handle the complexities of the
interaction between the two module distribution mechanisms as
far upstream as possible.

> Would this be a compromise that we could move forward with? I really
> believe that removing the dependency on having a module installed
> would remove the biggest majority of support issues we've had.

I don't think that anyone objects to removing the *dependency*.

Blessings and greetings,
Norbert