[Debian GNUstep maintainers] Misc issues with gnustep-base

[Yavor Doganov]

Eric Heintzmann wrote:
> During your tests, have you also checked the non Debian GNUstep
> Maintainers packages ? (biococoa, oolite , openvpn-auth-ldap, sbjson,
> sope, unar, sogo ...)

Of course.

> (There are also Gürkan's pending uploads: chess.app and pikopixel.app)

I don't have access to the sources so I haven't tested these.  Since
they're not in the archive (yet) they won't be binNMUed anyway.

> Le 22/10/2017 à 18:32, Yavor Doganov a écrit :
> > Unrelated suggestion: I propose to add this snippet to
> > gnustep-make/debian/addons/config.mk:

> I think it is a good idea.
> And It seems to me a good idea to upload this change now, before
> uploading other GNUstep packages.
> But on the other hand, I don't like the idea of multiplying uploads.
> What do you think ?

There is no need to hurry and mass changes to packages only because of
this are certainly unnecessary.  When the packages are updated as time
goes by, one of the things to update will be to remove this duplicated
code (if the package is not a candidate for backports).  We used the
very same approach when GNUSTEP_MAKEFILES/GNUSTEP_INSTALLATION_DOMAIN
were defined in config.mk in 2.6.6-2.