On 02/03/04, at 15:31 +0100, Thomas Viehmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > OK. Let's assume that I'm convinced that a pdfmerge script was useful. Good start :-) > There's no reason to produce packages for a one liner. > As for your "another way of doing things": Just because there's not one > exclusive right way doesn't mean that there's not a lot of wrong ways. Alright. If I follow your way of thinking correctly, then Debian should start removing lots of packages. I'll just pick one: igal! I have nothing against this package but I'm trying to follow your lines of reasoning. Take a look at igal: It's possible to make an image gallery program in one liner. :-p I don't have to show it to you coz I'm pretty sure you know how to do it. Well you can possibly argue that it's inefficient. You can list so many packages in Debian that we can find a one-liner turnaround. I believe you can list many, so why don't you start taking them off. > No. Those people would prefer to have pdfmerge without apt-get install. I wouldn't bet on it if I were you. This script is in the ATrpms repository <http://atrpms.physik.fu-berlin.de/> and many people from RH/Fedora world are already doing an apt-get install pdfmerge for your information. > I will do things in overly complicated ways most of the time. But that's > why there's a peer review list here to sort things out. > So far you're the only one objecting to including it in Debian. Our aim is to make it available to lots of people. If it weren't that useful I would keep it in my drawer. If many people do not want it in Debian, I'll back off. I'll keep it on SF.net (as deb) and in RedHat/Fedora repositories (rpms). With kind regards, Didier. --- PhD student. Singapore Synchrotron Light Source (SSLS) 5 Research Link, Singapore 117603 Email: slsbdfc at nus dot edu dot sg / didierbe at sps dot nus dot edu dot sg Web: http://ssls.nus.edu.sg
