[pkg-fso-maint] FSO data files

[Joachim Breitner]

Hi,

Am Montag, den 06.10.2008, 22:04 +0200 schrieb Luca Capello:
> >>   * fso-frameworkd-data
> >>     all the rest (/etc/frameworkd.conf, /etc/pointercal and udev rules)
> >
> > /etc/frameworkd.d should go into fso-frameworkd, as it’s the
> > configuration for that package.
> 
> [snip detailed explanaination of what I didn’t get]

I forgot that frameworkd is indeed hardware-specific. All complains
withdrawn.

It would be nice, tough (but that’s upstream) to have the hardware
specific configuration separate from the user’s configuration, which are
likely to change.

> I strongly prefer the latter, because it lets frameworkd as
> hardware-agnostic as possible.

Agreed.

> > I also don’t think that they should be all in one source package, but
> > rather each have their own. It would be nice to be able to upgrad
> > fso-frameworkd without downloading the new, but unchanged, -sounds
> > package.
> 
> Ops, sorry, I think I wasn't clear, let me (try to) explain...
> 
> - fso-frameworkd contains only frameworkd strictly necessary files, thus
>   no configuration, no sounds, no scenarios
> 
> - configuration files from upstream (frameworkd.conf, pointercal and
>   udev rules) goes into one single source package (openmoko-files),
>   which generates ATM two binary packages (fso-config-gta01 and
>   fso-config-gta02).
> 
>   These files are necessary for a working frameworkd as well as X11.
> 
> - sound files get their own source packages:
>   + fso-sounds-nonfree for Asterisk.sid and notify_message.mp3 [1], with
>     binary fso-frameworkd-sounds-nonfree
>   + fso-sounds-yue (since they're given specifically for the FSO
>     project [2]), with binary fso-frameworkd-sounds-yue
> 
>   I'd not include any sound in the configuration-file package for two
>   reasons:
>   a) you don't need the sounds to use the phone, only to receive
>      notifications (which are useful, not strictly necessary)
>   b) as soon as we put Asterisk.sid somewhere, the source package
>      belongs to nonfree
> 
> - scenario files can either have their own source package or be included
>   into the configuration-file source package.  My vote goes to the
>   latter, because these files should not change so often and we've all
>   the necessary files in one package.  Moreover, AFAIK we've scenario
>   files for the GTA01 and different ones for the GTA02.  Anyway, the
>   binary package should be called fso-frameworkd-scenarios-gta02, etc.
> 
>   Again, the scenario files are not stricly necessary: frameworkd starts
>   nicely without them.
> 
> I'm now pondering if we should not change the sound and scenario package
> names into something more general, like fso-sounds-nonfree and
> fso-scenarios-gta02: while these files are used by frameworkd, they
> aren't specific to it.

Agreed, also to the package names.

Thanks,
Joachim
-- 
Joachim "nomeata" Breitner
Debian Developer
  nomeata at debian.org | ICQ# 74513189 | GPG-Keyid: 4743206C
  JID: nomeata at joachim-breitner.de | http://people.debian.org/~nomeata
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: Dies ist ein digital signierter Nachrichtenteil
Url : http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-fso-maint/attachments/20081007/d8cb71ee/attachment.pgp