[Pkg-crosswire-devel] Module dependencies

[Jonathan Morgan]

On Tue, Jan 27, 2009 at 12:17 AM, Norbert Bollow <nb at bollow.ch> wrote:
> 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.)

Side issue, but I don't think the KJV is a good default for an English
speaker, because it is not written in our language.

>> 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

The Sword library is in general designed to do (c), sometimes even in
unreasonable circumstances (I believe there is special case code to
handle certain broken modules that have since been reissued, which is
definitely a little unusual at best).

>> 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.

You will still need to handle the case of "Copyrighted: Distribution
rights given to Crosswire".  Installmgr in Gnomesword and Bibletime
currently does support it.  Debian or Ubuntu cannot support it
perfectly out of the box with or without Crosswire's help, AFAIK,
since it would need at a minimum to add a Crosswire package
repository.  Without Crosswire's help (and not much support has been
given to packaging in the past) installmgr and downloadable zip files
remain the only way of getting at these modules.

Jon