[Pkg-octave-devel] [RFU] octave-interval 1.2.0-1

[Sébastien Villemot]

Le mercredi 07 octobre 2015 à 22:49 +0200, Oliver Heimlich a écrit :
> On 07.10.2015 22:43, Sébastien Villemot wrote:

> > - is the separation in two packages really necessary? My
> > understanding
> > is that separating arch-indep files is only warranted for big
> > packages,
> > because it saves space on the Debian ftp servers. In the present
> > case,
> > given that the package is small, I don't think that the overhead
> > created by a separate -common package is warranted. I think it just
> > adds complexity for no benefit. Or am I missing something?
> 
> It's absolutely fine to have a single package and this is also easier
> because you do not have the dependency trouble between the two (one
> would never use one without the other).
> 
> The only benefit would be to save some bytes, because the arch-dep
> part
> would be small. AFAIK, there is no other reason to separate the two.

Since you are the maintainer, and since the Debian policy does not make
an imperative prescription in this area, you are free to decide whether
to have two packages or one.

But if I were you, I would go for just one package in the present case.

-- 
 .''`.    Sébastien Villemot
: :' :    Debian Developer
`. `'     http://sebastien.villemot.name
  `-      GPG Key: 4096R/381A7594



-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-octave-devel/attachments/20151007/4cf2c975/attachment.sig>