On Tue, 2003-08-12 at 22:54, Daniel Taupin wrote: > > after some longish debate with Daniel Taupin (where I complained about > > some packaging issues) I finally noticed that the aforementioned tar.gz > > file isn't authorized at all by the maintainer. He officially just > > supports the zip version of his distribution. > > Not exactly: I provide the source files in a zip file, and I do not disagree > with other fellow transforming it into a tar.gz, and adding any executable > version of musixflx.c for all possible computers.
The problem was not the addition of executables but the confusion introduced by reorganizing the package tree and adding redundant files as described. > > While a separate version customized for Unix like operating systems is a > > quite good idea, I propose the following: > > > > (1) More coordination. Why should the zip file contain a different > > directory structure and additional redundancy (which I complained about > > to Daniel -- sorry, Daniel!)? The redundancy I mean is the additional > > system/c-sources directory only containing files already located > > elsewhere. > > > > (2) When a different distribution is really needed, please document it: > > > > (a) There should be a README file or similar describing the archive as a > > derived package > > (b) The package should even get a new name (I assume the "T" in T112 > > means "Taupin"?), at least slightly different > > T = Taupin, exact. Fine. Let's exchange this letter with another one for additional distributions. Then you won't get complaints about directories in the tar.gz (or whatever) you didn't even know about. bye, Roland
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
