From: Massimiliano Mirra <list@...>
Date: 2002-01-12T10:12:58+09:00
Subject: Re: [ANN] rpkg 0.1 (long)

On Sat, Jan 12, 2002 at 05:51:29AM +0900, Holden Glova wrote:
> > Pre-installation and post-installation scripts for rpkg are also on
> > the TODO list.  Actually, it would take just a few lines to implement
> > them now, but I'd rather first stabilize those things it already does.
> 
> if you go with the install.rb way, this is something that is the 
> resposibility of the package maintainer, no? There has to be a standard way 
> of doing things, that is part of the reason why Debian have dedicated package 
> maintainers that know the standard way of doing things.

If you are writing a Linux application and package it upstream for
Debian, you are only hitting part of your intended audience.  If on
the other hand you package it in .tar.gz, other people will package it
in .deb or .rpm and you will hit the whole audience.  That is why in
this context the upstream author and the package maintainer are not
(usually) the same person.

On the other hand, if you are writing a Ruby module, you intend to hit
the Ruby audience.  If the packaging system is platform independent to
begin with, you can package your module as a .rpk upstream and still
hit your whole audience.

Hope it is clear why I like dpkg applied to Ruby. ;-)


Massimiliano