On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 8:08 AM, Dominic Hopf <dmaphy@googlemail.com> wrote:
Am Sonntag, den 18.12.2011, 11:41 -0800 schrieb Matthew Brush:
> > The situation for Tag files taken from [2] is a bit special, because
> > they currently are just additional sources for the Geany package in
> > Fedora and thus installed when you do a `yum install geany`. Users did
> > not claim yet about a bloated package, they rather provided feedback
> > that they found this a cool feature. I don't see a reason (yet) why I
> > should put every tag file in a separate sub-package. I can imagine a
> > separate package for geany-tags, though. This however will be not easy
> > to change, since removing the tags files from the Geany package (they
> > were there since Geany is in Fedora) would significantly change the
> > behavior of Geany in Fedora and thus maybe only can be done between
> > different Fedora releases.
> >
> The problem is that your source [2] isn't where the tags are anymore,
> they're all moved to the Wiki and there's lots of new ones as well.  The
> reason you might want separately packages for different tag file
> languages is that Geany becomes terribly slow as you add more tags for a
> given language. If you have too many tag files, when you a load a file
> that uses the language of those tags, Geany freezes for a noticeable
> amount of time while it parses the tag files.
Good point, I'll rethink how the packaging in Fedora can be improved and
will update references to the wiki.

> I don't know about this, but finally we're getting to my original
> question, "can someone make packages for geany-themes" :)  So is this
> something you wouldn't mind doing for Fedora?
Yep, definitely. I'll do so as soon as I get a round to it and no other
Fedora package beats me doing it. :)

Anyway, the repository is yours [1], right? I suggest making this repo
"official" and move it to the Geany organisation. :)

> > Did I miss something for the Python and Vala stuff (are they there yet?)
> > or was this just example names? :)
> The Vala binding is two files (geany.vapi and geany.deps) which need to
> go into the system's VAPI dir (it's /usr/share/vala-VERSION/vapi here).
Are they delivered with the Geany tarball or should they be obtained via
[2]? In latter case I'd also suggest to make it "official". :)

>   This allows to write plugins in Vala, and at present the one plugin
> (which I just added) that uses the binding embeds these files in the
> source, but as soon as one more Vala plugin comes along, it will be
> weird having the Vala binding embedded twice in two different places,
> which is why I suggested a package for it.  IIUC, the Vala files would
> typically be installed with the -dev package (on Debian), along with the
> pkg-config file and headers.
Well, if I provide the Vala bindings in the geany-devel package in
Fedora, and add a Vala plugin as a new geany-plugins sub-package which
requires geany-devel, wouldn't that do the job? - You'd just need to use
the Vala stuff from /usr/share/vala-VERSION/vapi in your plugin then.

> I'm not too sure about how GeanyPy should be packaged.  It provides two
> things; a Python binding and a Geany-Plugin.  Typically in Debian, the
> binding would be a package called `python-geany` but since the actual
> Geany-Plugin for GeanyPy can't work without the Python binding and the
> Python binding can't work without GeanyPy, it might not make much sense
> to split it up. Probably best here is just to have it be a regular
> plugin with both parts in it.
I think so too. :)


[1] https://github.com/codebrainz/geany-themes
[2] https://github.com/codebrainz/geany-vala-binding

Dominic Hopf

Key Fingerprint: A7DF C4FC 07AE 4DDC 5CA0  BD93 AAB0 6019 CA7D 868D

Geany mailing list

Instead of getting a maintainer for Fedora, a maintainer for Debian etc we could utilise the Suse OBS which creates packages for many distro's in one build service http://en.opensuse.org/Portal:Build_Service