-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: Bug#753620: wishlist: idl/gdl-written software
Resent-Date: Sun, 6 Jul 2014 12:44:12 +0000 (UTC)
Resent-From: debian-as...@lists.debian.org
Date: Sun, 06 Jul 2014 14:43:48 +0200
From: debian-de...@liska.ath.cx (Оlе Ѕtrеісhеr)
Reply-To: Ole Streicher <deb...@liska.ath.cx>
To: debian-as...@lists.debian.org
Sergio Gelato <sergio.gel...@astro.su.se> writes:
In a Debian world, these packages only work with GDL, so GDL is required
(and not just recommended).
OK, maybe it really should depend on gnudatalanguage | idl-interpreter
(or whatever the virtual package name would be), just like some Java
libraries depend on default-jre-headless | java5-runtime-headless .
The policy requires that a package in main can only depend on other
packages in main. I am not sure how this is for the operands of the "|"
operator.
I have no ambition to dictate Debian policy so I'll bow out of further
discussion on this point. There's always equivs anyway.
For packages in main, the policy is a dictate; that's the idea of
Debian. Contrib and non-free are different.
I worry a bit that otherwise GDL is just used as an excuse to ship
packages that require non-free software in main.
I don't think that should be a concern: wouldn't you agree that if the
package doesn't work with GDL it shouldn't recommend (much less depend
on) GDL? It then falls outside the scope of this discussion since the
reasons (if any) to include it in Debian would not be related to GDL.
If a package does not work if the dependencies are fullfilled, it should
not be in Debian.
Just to make it clear: I'm not asking for anyone to package idlastro and
friends. If someone does, then I'll consider using the packages and will
be grateful if they meet my needs. I think I can see some value in:
-- providing a policy and/or a canonical example for how to package
GDL add-ons (as we have for Perl, Python, Java, Ruby, Octave, etc.)
This one is independent of whether a package goes into Debian main
(I still think this is only possible for packages that function with
GDL) or Debian contrib or non-free (no problem with a dependency from IDL).
-- testing idlastro etc. with GDL and resolving or documenting any
incompatibilities found.
Since the original request was an outcome from a GDL conference, I would
think that was the original idea.
The latter might help make GDL a viable alternative to proprietary
IDL; right now the users I support don't perceive it as such.
The idea of Debian is to distribute free software. The compromise for
proprietary software and its dependencies are the contrib and non-free
archives (which are not a regular part of Debian itself). So, our
(Debians) effort should go into the GDL support in the first place.
I leave it to those who would actually do the work to decide whether
it's worth their time.
Agreed.
Again: There is nothing wrong with putting a package into contrib if it
does not work with GDL. The procedure is mainly the same.
Best regards
Ole
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-astro-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact
listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/87tx6uwtbv....@our.domain.is.not.set
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
