Hi Sean-- Thanks for your thoughtful and helpful feedback. I've just sent a revised series (5 patches) that takes into account everything that you said.
I've declined to adopt two suggestions (please see my reasons below):
On Sat 2019-11-09 08:46:34 -0700, Sean Whitton wrote:
>> diff --git a/debian/control b/debian/control
>> index fc2bccc..4c3b956 100644
>> --- a/debian/control
>> +++ b/debian/control
>> @@ -38,6 +38,8 @@ Depends:
>> Recommends:
>> devscripts,
>> git,
>> + gpg,
>> + gpg-agent,
>
> I think that Recommends: is a bit strong here. It would be perfectly
> reasonable to use the whole mailscripts package without using this
> feature of email-print-mime-structure. So please use Suggests:.
we have python3-pgpy in Recommends: already, and this is analogous
functionality. If you want to move them both to Suggests, i won't
object too vociferously, but i think it would be a shame.
Recommends already permits people to avoid installing these dependencies
on constrained systems, and many users will have gpg and gpg-agent
installed already, so this isn't actually much of an additional cost for
many people. The goal of Recommends is to install the things that
people will find typically useful, and i think this piece of
functionality is (or at least should be) typically useful.
> Also, reading the description of bin:gpg, it seems that you need to have
> bin:gnupg for all secret key operations.
bin:gnupg is the whole shebang -- much more than
email-print-mime-structure needs, including things like gpg-wks-client,
dirmngr, and gnupg-l10n. gpg-agent provides secret key material access,
and gpg provides the binary frontend, so this really is the right
surface area for the dependencies. (i'm one of the debian maintainers
for the package, and was responsible for this particular split, fwiw)
--dkg
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
