[Pkg-javascript-devel] Bug#976331: Bug#976331: [JS Policy] what to set in "Provides" field ?

[Jonas Smedegaard]

Quoting Xavier (2020-12-06 07:59:25)
> Le 06/12/2020 à 02:14, Jonas Smedegaard a écrit :
> > Quoting Xavier (2020-12-03 21:19:48)
> >> Le 03/12/2020 à 19:17, Jonas Smedegaard a écrit :
> >>> This bug 976331 is *not* about repackaging embedded modules as 
> >>> separate *source* packages, but only about exposing embedded 
> >>> modules as *binary* packages - either virtual or real ones.
> >>
> >> That's part of what I misunderstood. So OK to do this here (after 
> >> ftpmaster rejection since you pushed node-serialize-javascript).
> >>
> >> But: I was able to upload a lot of packages this year because I 
> >> automatized many things. So splitting all mixed packages means 
> >> manually regenerating debian/control, debian/rules, 
> >> debian/*.install,... This means less uploads, more obsolescence and 
> >> then less security (and also less interest in doing such manual 
> >> stuff).
> > 
> > Great that you develop tools to maintain packages more efficiently 
> > and more automated.  If done in compliance with Debian Policy, that 
> > is.
> > 
> > Do you say that it is not possible to automate packaging with 
> > embedded modules provided as virtual or real packages?  Why do you 
> > think you can only develop efficient automating routines with hidden 
> > modules?
> 
> Pkg-js-tools already automates virtual package.

Ok, so you are saying that current automation _is_ effective for virtual 
binary packages but handling _real_ binary packages need manual work.


> > ftpmaster wants to avoid too tiny source packages, but ftpmaster 
> > does not want duplicate code.
> 
> No you're wrong here, they accepted a lot of embedded copies for JS 
> (see Jquery for example), not for C.
> 
> Also they don't want too many little binary packages (not only 
> source).

Sorry, I was unclear.  Let me try rephrase to clarify:

ftpmaster strongly dislikes (i.e. they will reject) too tiny source 
packages, but ftpmaster does not actively encourage (even if they might 
tolerate) duplicate code.

My point was not that ftpmaster rejects duplicate code (they might in 
severe cases, but that is not really their task to judge on).

My point was, instead, that it is wrong to interpret the fact that 
ftpmaster rejects tiny source packages as an endorsement of duplicate 
source through _repeated_ embedding of same module.

It is not the task of ftpmaster to check _all_ Policy Violations - and 
even if it was then a package not rejected is not a proof that the 
package is optimally aligned with Debian Policy.


 - Jonas

-- 
 * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt
 * Tlf.: +45 40843136  Website: http://dr.jones.dk/

 [x] quote me freely  [ ] ask before reusing  [ ] keep private
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: signature
URL: <http://alioth-lists.debian.net/pipermail/pkg-javascript-devel/attachments/20201206/7ab17538/attachment.sig>