On 20-May-2013, Barry Warsaw wrote: > Hi Ben […] > > > Upstream version 3.5 introduces yet more duplicated library code that > > is currently not packaged properly for Debian, so upstream version 3.5 > > cannot be packaged yet. > > I'm confused though because if those block bug packages aren't packaged for > Debian yet (they're wnpp), then how can they be duplicated library code?
Duplicated in other packages. (e.g. ‘jquery.hotkeys.js’ is in Debian's ‘wordpress’, ‘spotweb’, etc.) More generally, the problem isn't necessarily that the code is duplicated. The problem is that the code is bundled in with a work, yet the maintainers of that work (‘python-coverage’) aren't the maintainers of that bundled code (e.g. the ‘isonscreen’ library). The solution does not entail adding more Debian packages bundling library code that is not maintained by the package upstream maintainers. > Can't we get coverage 3.6 into Debian, with enabled Python 3 support now? If you can see a way to do it without adding those libraries in the package, sure. I think it would not be worthwhile to bundle them with ‘python-coverage’. -- \ “Some forms of reality are so horrible we refuse to face them, | `\ unless we are trapped into it by comedy. To label any subject | _o__) unsuitable for comedy is to admit defeat.” —Peter Sellers | Ben Finney <[email protected]>
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
