[squeak-dev] Ubuntu package maintainers help

> El 20 de abril de 2009 23:31, Lex Spoon <[hidden email]> escribió:
>
>> Jose, the packages Matej is now maintaining really are far ahead of the
>> ones you have uploaded.  They reflect dozens of hours by at least four
>> maintainers, and there have been multiple insights along the way about
>> how to make things Just Work for the common use cases.
>>
>> In case it needs being explicit, here are some things those packages do
>> that are not in the ones you have uploaded:
>>
>> A "squeak" package that pulls in everything a VM, changes, and sources
>> file.
>> A rich set of images files (hich would need to remain in an external
>> apt repository)
>> A "squeak" script that works when typed by itself... ...and also works
>> with the images and sources packages. Desktop menu items.
>>
>> We should use these packages as a basis going forward.  The DFSG-free
>> ones can go into Debian proper, and the others can stay on
>> ftp.squeak.org.  The libMPEG issue is a good catch, but it seems pretty
>> trivial, isn't it?  It could be disabled for now, and later provided as
>> an external plugin hosted on ftp.squeak.org.
>>
>>
>>
> After reading all your arguments I only can say the same I wrote in my
> first email in this thread: I don't find anything else to do now from my
> side. I also think that some of you haven't even checked the package in
> Debian as some of the things you say to defend the use of the squeak.org
> packages are done by the Debian package too (as the script that works
> when typed itself or the Debian menu integration). My main issue is that
> I don't want the users to have to use a script to launch anything. With
> the Debian package they can click on a squeak image (that appears with a
> Squeak icon on their desktops) and open it, or launch squeak from the
> menus and have a graphical menu to choose the image they want to use.
> The vm itself is exactly the same, with the same bugs in Debian or in
> Squeak.org. So I don't see any benefit of using the vm from Squeak.org
> in Debian, it would be a backwards step. Obviously I'll be glad to
> receive patches to make it a better package.
>
> As Matej said previously, the vm package in Squeak.org can be improved.
> I fully agree, and I also do think that we should merge the package, but
> now the package in Debian is better from my point of view: it is not
> incompatible with the images in squeak.org and gives an easier
> experience to the non-technical users. I'm not rejecting anything, I'm
> just saying that both packages are very similar, almost the same, but
> the differences are still important from my point of view and don't see
> any reason to upload to Debian the vm from squeak.org, maybe the
> opposite would be more reasonable.
>
> Regards.
> José L.