Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

sm-discuss - Re: [SM-Discuss] enlightenment, e17, e16

sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Public SourceMage Discussion List

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: "Jeremy Blosser (emrys)" <jblosser-smgl AT firinn.org>
  • To: sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
  • Subject: Re: [SM-Discuss] enlightenment, e17, e16
  • Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2006 20:21:47 -0600

On Mar 01, Ladislav Hagara [ladislav.hagara AT unob.cz] wrote:
> (I was maintaining e-cvs grimoire [1] some time and on 2004-03-26 I
> created "e" section in standard grimoire and became its maintainer. On
> 2004-12-15 I added DR17 support to enlightenment spell. After one year
> on 2005-12-18 the DR17 support was removed from enlightenment spell and
> e17 spell was created. I as a maintainer did not agree with it.)
>
> IMHO, new enlightenment spell is confusing because it installs stable
> DR16 version, it uses source e16-0.16.8.tar.gz, the binary file is
> /usr/bin/e16 and desktop file e16.desktop.

I'm pretty sure at least the /usr/bin/e16 stuff is from upstream. IIRC kwo
moved all the e 16 stuff to be named 'e16' so people could have both e16
and e17 installed. I haven't dug through the spell changes just now to
verify, though.

> Spell e17 installs binary /usr/bin/enlightenment and
> enlightenment.desktop. When e17 become stable it should be probably
> renamed back to enlightenment. Users who want to install DR17 are
> confused now when they "cast enlightenment" and install "old" version.
> Moreover some dependencies are broken [2].
>
> What next?
> Personally I would merge e17 back into enlightenment spell. Seems Gentoo
> also use one enlightenment ebuild for DR16 and DR17 [3]. The next
> possibility is to rename new enlightenment spell to e16 spell (we would
> have e16 and e17 spells), or rename enlightenment to e16 and e17 to new
> enlightenment. All is better than current state.
> What is your opinion?

My opinion is I don't like multiple spells for one package either. I agree
it confuses people. HOWEVER, sorcery can't currently do things like
install multiple versions of the same spell at once or have version-based
dependencies. Until it can I think that sometimes we may need to do this.

As far as this particular case, I agree you should have consulted first as
the section maintainer, and if there was disagreement on what to do then at
least the grimoire team lead should have been engaged as well to help
figure it out. I don't think Eric was trying to act in a PL capacity in
doing something like this, one spell's versioning frankly isn't significant
enough to call for that. Also I think that dependences which are now
broken are obviously bugs and the person that created them should be
responsible to see they get fixed.

As a long time e16 user myself, things I would hope are considered while
you guys figure out if this should stay as one or two spells include:

- Upstream wants to allow people to install both versions at once, ideas on
how can we support this using just one spell?

- Certain things need to depend on either e16 or e17 and we need a way to
handle that, again, preferably while allowing both to be installed at
once.

Attachment: pgp9ZaedfFlBn.pgp
Description: PGP signature




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page