[DRE-maint] Comments regarding ruby-oedipus-lex_2.6.0-1_amd64.changes

[Lucas Kanashiro]

Hi Scott,

Em 09/12/2022 17:29, Scott Kitterman escreveu:
> I took a quick look at this package.
>
> One comment:
>
> You should put the exact copyright claim in debian/copyright:
>
>   Ryan Davis, seattle.rb
>
> That's not critical, since the correct copyright claim ends up in the
> package from the source files, but should be fixed in a future upload.

Thanks for raising this, I added a commit to the git repo and it will be 
included in the next upload:

https://salsa.debian.org/ruby-team/ruby-oedipus-lex/-/commit/742d5c915f57fbc3f7cd52570da0285ecd1a3634

> One question:
>
> The binary has no dependencies.  That seems wrong, since, at the very least
> this needs Ruby installed.  I'm not very familiar with standard Ruby
> packaging practices.  Is this normal/correct for a Ruby package?

The way we add ruby related dependencies nowadays is using 
${ruby:Depends} in the Depends field, and it will be replaced by the 
right set of dependencies by gem2deb if I am not mistaken (someone from 
the team correct me if this is wrong). Usually the ruby interpreter is a 
runtime dependency when we ship a script that can be executed by the 
users and then ruby is required.

I took a quick look and I was able to find another package that does not 
depend on anything which is ruby-webrick, so I believe this is the 
expected behavior. One can claim that those library packages does not 
need ruby as a runtime dependency because they are useless if there is 
not external code to consume them, and then those will require ruby. If 
we think this is wrong and the behavior should be different we need to 
file a bug and change the way ${ruby:Depends} is set.

-- 
Lucas Kanashiro