[Pkg-catalyst-maintainers] Re: Bug#333123: ITP: libcatalyst-plugin-static-simple-perl -- Make serving static pages in Catalyst painless

[Krzysztof Krzyzaniak]

Florian Ragwitz wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 10, 2005 at 07:32:19PM +0200, Krzysztof Krzyzaniak wrote:
> 
>>Florian Ragwitz wrote:
>>
>>>On Mon, Oct 10, 2005 at 04:28:35PM +0200, Krzysztof Krzyzaniak
>>>(eloy) wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>* Package name    : libcatalyst-plugin-static-simple-perl
>>>
>>>Shouldn't this go into libcatalyst-modules-perl?
>>
>>Ah, ok. I know what you mean (i've read
>>.http://pkg-catalyst.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?PkgCatalystPolicy
>>otherwise).
>>
>>Hmm, hard question. Maybe create list of 'core' modules which will go
>>into libcatalyst-modules-perl (I mean that ones which will be used in
>>most catalyst application) and rest which extends catalyst but are for
>>special purposes.
> 
> 
> Yes, let's split up libcatalyst-modules-perl. How about
> libcatalyst-modules-misc-perl?

I am thinking about separate module for each package. I don't think it 
would
be to much  (up to 20 packages I think). For example there is 43 modules 
libapache[2*]
for perl). I don't think that putting more than one session package,
more than one authentication package in one meta-package is good idea.
But we always could ask on debian-devel what people think.


>>http://lists.rawmode.org/pipermail/catalyst/2005-October/001880.html
>>
>>Soon new release with excluded Catalyst-Engine-Apache.
> 
> 
> Thanks. Who want's to do the upgrade? I really should subscribe that
> list.

I will fill ITP bug against Catalyst-Engine-Apache and do initial upload 
to svn if you don't mind

   eloy
-- 
-------e-l-o-y---------------------------e-l-o-y- at -k-o-f-e-i-n-a-.-n-e-t------

        jak to dobrze, że są oceany - bez nich byłoby jeszcze smutniej