On Tuesday 09 June 2015 17:22:30 Tony Houghton wrote: > > Depending on its size, it may be better to keep roxterm-common: this > > package is arch:all and this would avoid duplication these data for each > > arch. > IIRC I was thinking of doing that a long time ago (before the GTK2/3 > split) but was advised against it because the data files weren't very > big. But they're probably considerably bigger now, mainly because of the > translations.
Then we need the current data size to find out the best solution. > If I did that I think I'd still have to use Breaks or > Conflicts against the GTK2 packages I'm dropping; I think so too. > again I'd need some > advice on exactly how to do that. After reading [1], I think a "Breaks: roxterm-gtk2" should be enough. > > Next, you may want to consider what will happen if (or when?) gtk4 appears > > on your radar screen: will you split roxterm package again ? > > There were reasons for people to stick to GTK2, such as not liking GNOME > 3 and because of <https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=649680>, > but I hope the GTK3/4 transition will be smoother and not give me > reasons to support both at once. Fair enough. That's your call. Hope this helps [1] https://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-relationships.html#s-conflicts -- https://github.com/dod38fr/ -o- http://search.cpan.org/~ddumont/ http://ddumont.wordpress.com/ -o- irc: dod at irc.debian.org -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/3987795.LGxLKt1BZP@ylum
