[Pkg-corba-devel] Suggesting omniidl4-python
thomas.g.girard at free.fr
Wed Dec 19 22:06:17 UTC 2007
Le jeudi 13 décembre 2007 à 22:15 +0000, Floris Bruynooghe a écrit :
> I was thinking about some of the suggests/recommends. Here's what I
> would propose:
> omniidl4 Suggests: omniidl4-python
agreed. Now that Recommends: get automatically pulled (unless configured
otherwise), it makes sense.
> python-omniorb2 Recommends: python-omniorb2-omg
agreed. But it should probably be renamed to python-omniorb3. (And that
means we need to ensure the transition works.) Or to python-omniorb to
avoid another renaming later? I'll have a look at the python policy to
see if this topic is covered.
(Unrelated: in python-omniorb2 2.6-3.3 there are Python files for COS
services; I wonder if they should rather be in python-omniorb-omg.)
> python-omniorb2 Suggests: omniidl4-python
Hmmm... I don't agreee with this one. If you want to use a CORBA service
then you don't need omniidl4-python. Suggesting it would not add
anything, because if you need omniidl4-python you'll know it. For
instance, if you have defined a CORBA interface and want to implement
this interface in Python, then you know you need an IDL-to-Python
translator. Conversely, if you want to install an application that
relies on python-omniorb (via a Depends: relationship), then you might
want to inspect what's suggested by this dependency, and (wrongly)
decide you want to install omniidl4-python.
Citing the policy:
This is used to declare that one package may be more useful with
one or more others. Using this field tells the packaging system
and the user that the listed packages are related to this one
and can perhaps enhance its usefulness, but that installing this
one without them is perfectly reasonable.
Installing omniidl4-python along with python-omniorb2 will not enhance
If you agree with this and have time to commit these changes then please
do. Otherwise I'll do it myself next week.
More information about the Pkg-corba-devel