Hello Fred, On Tue, 19 Jul 2016 11:15:00 -0400 Fred Drake <f...@fdrake.net> wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 19, 2016 at 10:47 AM, Alexander Gerasiov <g...@cs.msu.su> > wrote: > > Every plugin is just a small parser class which is called from > > ofxstatement, parses input file and pass data back to main app. > > These plugins are developed independently by various people who > > publish them in separate repositories (mostly on github). > > The high point I picked up here is that each plugin has it's own > lifecycle, controlled by independent developers. Most of them do not have real lifecycle, but exists on the scheme "bank modified format -> author updated parser", so most the time we do not need outdated version, but want fresh "snapshot" of actual plugins versions. > > > I decided to package ofxstatement as separate package, but put all > > plugins in one package oxfstatement-plugins. > > > > I'm not skilled in distributing python apps and packaging python > > apps into .deb, so I'd like to get some review and feedback from the > > community before upload to archive. > > Grouping the plugins like this seems odd to me, because of the > independent lifecycles. Perhaps something to consider is to create > separate debian packages for each (with names like > ofxstatement-plugin-abcdef), and maybe a convenience meta-package that > depends on some set of the plugin packages (ofxstatement-plugins). There are ~20 plugins, each of them have a pair of small files (and heap of python's stuff). Better put them all in one binary package, I believe. In such case we save some archive space and much maintainer's time. -- Best regards, Alexander Gerasiov Contacts: e-mail: g...@cs.msu.su Homepage: http://gerasiov.net Skype: gerasiov PGP fingerprint: 04B5 9D90 DF7C C2AB CD49 BAEA CA87 E9E8 2AAC 33F1
