Am Samstag, den 10.02.2007, 21:39 +0100 schrieb Reinhard Tartler: > Yes, the selection is indeed quite random. The main motivation for the > split was to promote the dependencies from 'Recommends' to 'Depends'. In > order to not get too many dependencies from libxine1 (which has a lot of > reverse depends), I moved some plugins to seperate packages. > > I tried to keep the libxine1 package functional, without imposing too > many and 'heavyweight' dependencies.
This sounds rational, maybe the plugin selection for the packages could be motivated like this: - The `libxine1' package contains all plugins which do not pull in further dependencies, except those who are expected on a desktop system anyway (e.g. libogg*, libvorbis*, libtheora*). [Did you notice that libxine1 has dependencies on libxine1?] - The `libxine1-ffmpeg' contains all plugins which pull in further dependencies, which may not be part of a minimal installation. However, the suffix `-ffmpeg' would be inappropriate and not describe the package's contents. Something like `libxine1-extras' might fit better. I think this is similar to the way the gstreamer maintainers split up their plugin packages (see README.Debian and HACKING.Debian in the `gst-plugins-base0.10-0.10.10' tarball). By the way, the separation of KDE- and GNOME-related plugins was the best idea anyway! ;) > Yes, this is indeed necessary. Perhaps you can make some suggestions for > that? Sure! As soon as the criteria for the plugin selection are defined. ;) > Thanks again for your report! Thanks for your great work on this package! Nice greetings, Fabian -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
