multimedia-blends: policy question(s)

IOhannes m zmölnig zmoelnig at
Fri Jun 12 00:53:51 UTC 2015

On 06/11/2015 09:23 PM, Felipe Sateler wrote:
>> synthesis at all; darn - did i just here me volunteer to maintain a
>> "puredata" task?)
> :)
> I don't think we need per-application-ecosystem metapackages.

but right now the user does not have a possibility to install an entire
ecosystem like Pd's.
which i think is a flaw.

if my use-case of meta-packages is a single pkg installation to get me
running for a given task, then i find a package that pulls in an entire
ecosystems of more relevance than a a broad selection of packages that
could be useful in that task.

but maybe Pd is a bit of an outlier here, with 70+ (binary) packages
that all belong to the same ecosystem.

and of course i'm biased here.
i do believe that Debian should have a meta-package for the entire
pd-universe; and so i thought that the multimedia-blends would fit the bill.

> Non-soundsynth packages like gem should of course not be in the
> soundsynth package, maybe we need a videosynth package?

i would have put it into the "video" task, but now i see that this is
full with video *players* (and the occasional vjing and converter tool).

so actually i would split "video" in multiple packages ("videoplayers",
"videosynth", "vjing",...) and have the original video package
Depends/Recommends these.


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <>

More information about the pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list