[Pkg-ruby-extras-maintainers] librmagick-ruby override disparity

[Thierry Reding]

* Paul van Tilburg wrote:
[...]
> So apparently, we did not.  I talked with some guys on #debian (under
> which vorlon and Jeroen van de Woffelaar).  And he suggests that all
> bindings or any other ruby _libs_ go into libs, our doc packages in docs
> and apps go into their representive section (graphic app in graphics,
> network app in network, etc.).  To cite Jeroen:
> 
> <jvw> it's a 'library' -> a piece of code, intended to be plug and
>       played for useage in some bigger app
> 
> I think we should most definitely bring this up for the Ruby Policy
> discussion. Meanwhile I want to have a quick decision on what to
> do with this package, since it solves FTBS bugs.
> * Leave all at 'interpreters'?

I don't like this option very much at all. librmagick-ruby is not an
interpreter. Nor are any other of our libraries.

> * Set it to libs/doc?

This is my favorite option. As Jeroen already said, it is primarily a
library, so that is what it should be classified as.

> * Set it to graphics/doc?

One argument in favour of this scheme would be that I would search for
librmagick-ruby in `graphics' rather than `libs'. But then again, I've never
really used sections for searching.

Thierry

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
Url : http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-ruby-extras-maintainers/attachments/20060213/8330fd11/attachment.pgp