Hello, (Ubuntu "maintainers" and Debian's co-maintainer CCed) On Sunday 28 February 2010 16:56:19, David Paleino wrote: > [..] > > desktopcouch :Depends: python-desktopcouch, > > python-desktopcouch-records > > python-desktopcouch :Depends: desktopcouch > > python-desktopcouch-records :Depends: python-desktopcouch > > > > Circular dependencies are known to cause problems during upgrade, so we > > should try to get rid of them. > > > > In this case, the three package are arch:all and come from the same > > source package, so there is little point to split desktopcouch in > > three packages if the user is required to install all of them > > anymway. > > I'll see if merging the packages is a solution, or if breaking the circular > dependency is better.
I analyzed the situation a bit, and here it follows.
The package separation really comes from the Ubuntu packaging. I started from
0.5-0ubuntu1, and the packages were already split like this. I usually tend to
avoid useless deltas between the two distributions, but this time it seems
like Ubuntu guys made it wrong :)
desktopcouch really depends on python-desktopcouch, i.e. files in the former
package depend on files in the latter to properly work. This is normal.
I can't tell whether python-desktopcouch really depend on the desktopcouch
package. However, without it, it's totally useless. So this could be a point
in favour of merging the two packages.
Trying to look compatibility with Ubuntu, it seems they have something strange
going on (from a lucid chroot):
# apt-cache rdepends desktopcouch
desktopcouch
Reverse Depends:
python-desktopcouch
evolution-couchdb
# apt-cache rdepends python-desktopcouch
python-desktopcouch
Reverse Depends:
xul-ext-bindwood
desktopcouch-tools
python-desktopcouch-records
desktopcouch
# apt-cache rdepends python-desktopcouch-records
python-desktopcouch-records
Reverse Depends:
quickly-ubuntu-template
lernid
desktopcouch-tools
bughugger
gwibber-service
gwibber
desktopcouch
i.e. it seems like there's no clear "consensus" on what to depend on, if a
package needs desktopcouch capabilities.
If we merged desktopcouch with python-desktopcouch, we'd need to change
dependencies in the relevant packages. However, I suppose python-desktopcouch
and python-desktopcouch-records were created for a specific reason.
Ubuntu people (CCed) [1], especially Ken, who was the first packager: is there
a rationale for this package layout? Do you know which one of these packages
is doing it wrong? Any opinion about the circular dependencies?
I'd like to avoid useless deltas between Debian and Ubuntu, *especially*
regarding available binary packages. However, my opinion is that desktopcouch
is a service available on the user's host (together with couchdb), so a
package needing its functionality should depend on "desktopcouch".
In my opinion, python-desktopcouch should be merged in the aforementioned, and
maybe python-desktopcouch-records renamed to "desktopcouch-records" -- and
move everything out of PYTHONPATH. I believe those are "private" modules, not
really usable from outside.
What do you think? :)
Kindly,
David
[1] by the way, it would be cool if we maintained the package together in
Debian, and let it naturally flow in Ubuntu :) -- me and Kartik were
planning to form a "Debian DesktopCouch Team", which I would be happy if
it was a "Debian/Ubuntu DesktopCouch Team".
--
. ''`. Debian developer | http://wiki.debian.org/DavidPaleino
: :' : Linuxer #334216 --|-- http://www.hanskalabs.net/
`. `'` GPG: 1392B174 ----|----
`- 2BAB C625 4E66 E7B8 450A C3E1 E6AA 9017 1392 B174
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
