Thomas Klausner <wiz%NetBSD.org@localhost> writes:
> On Fri, Nov 07, 2008 at 07:40:34PM -0500, Greg Troxel wrote:
>> Why do you need meta-pkgs? Aren't they all in meta-pkgs/gnome that
>> everyone will just install?
>
> No.
> meta-pkgs/gnome is the "GNOME desktop" meta package, the one that the
> end users should install.
> GNOME also defines "admin", "bindings", "platform", and "devtools"
> packages. "platform" contains the most important libraries, "admin" is
> for system admininstration, "devtools" for developing mostly C
> programs in GNOME, and "bindings" for programming GNOME in other
> languages (at least that's how I understand it).
OK - I agree it's good to follow upstream. Related to my 'base'
complaint earlier, perhaps I should file that upstream.
>> Seriously, I think we do need fine-grained control over this, and would
>> favor gnome-bindings-lang, but I think you are saying that for py it
>> should be at the beginning to split python{23,24,25}.
>
> Exactly.
>
>> What's p5? If that's perl5, it should say perl5, unless the gnome
>> people insist on p5. Seems too much like p4, a proprietary VCS.
>
> All our perl modules are named p5-Some-Thing. It's a pkgsrc thing as
> well. The gnomes don't insist on it :)
I must have been really out of it - I maintain
graphics/p5-Image-ExifTool. For some reason I thought this was a
proposed new abbreviation.
So I guess the key question is whether it's better to have
gnome-bindings-foo and then a few foo-gnome-bindings, or whether we
should flip all of them to be foo-gnome-bindings.
There is also guile-gnome, which I pretend to maintain but haven't
recently, and I think it's the official guile binding.
For python, apparently upstream calls in gnome-python, and we call it
py-gnome2 currently. From x11/py-gnome2/DESCR:
The gnome-python package contains the source packages for the Python
bindings for GNOME called PyGNOME.
PyGNOME is an extension module for Python that provides access to the
base GNOME libraries, so you have access to more widgets, a simple
configuration interface, and metadata support.
So do we need '-bindings' in the package name?
Attachment:
pgpjxxhFjfdsn.pgp
Description: PGP signature