[Geany] Geany Themes packages

[Matthew Brush]

On 12/18/2011 05:26 AM, Dominic Hopf wrote:
> Am Samstag, den 17.12.2011, 21:27 -0800 schrieb Matthew Brush:
>> Here's a reasonable list of packages that could exist:
>>
>> geany<- core application
>> geany-common<- ?
>> geany-dev<- geany.pc and header files
>> geany-extras<- geany themes, bindings, tags
>> geany-vala<- vala binding
>> geany-python<- python binding
>> geany-themes<- all theme files from geany-themes
>> geany-tags<- all geany tags (slooooooow!)
>> geany-tags-c<- C tags only
>> geany-tags-python<- Python tags only, and so on...
>> ...other tags
>> geany-plugins<- all plugins combined
>> geany-plugins-common<- ?
>> geany-plugin-addons<- Addon plugin only, and so on...
>> ...other plugins
>
> I'd basically say we shouldn't even care about the packages of specific
> GNU/Linux distributions upstream and leave the packaging up to the
> particular package maintainer. They have to find the right way for their
> users to provide as much flexibility as possible for the user when
> installing stuff and keeping package maintenance efforts feasible for
> them.
>

Yeah, I just meant it to provide some ideas because there's some new 
stuff that isn't currently packaged.

> While we're at it and I'm maintaining some stuff on Fedora I can tell
> you my personal opinion: I'd put everything I find as a separate
> repository upstream [1] in a separate package. In case some packages are
> too big or it would make sense, I'd maybe split a package into
> sub-packages.
>
> Note the technical difference between separate packages and sub-packages
> as it is the case for example for the geany-plugins-* stuff in Fedora:
> geany-plugins is another package than geany, but geany-plugins-$foo is a
> sub-package of geany-plugins. There is no installable so-called
> meta-package called "geany-plugins" which would install every plugin,
> users would just type `yum install geany-plugins-*` to install
> everything.
>

I didn't know about this, I've only ever made Debian packages, and even 
that was just for my own use :)

> 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.

> To get back to the topic: A geany-themes package would be easily
> possible, not sure yet about the way to package - separate package or
> sub-package of geany, but this mainly is a question of package
> maintenance in Fedora and the difference will not be even obvious for
> the user. I tend to put it in a newly created separate package since the
> themes are (or will/would be) provided in a separate repository upstream
> and extending the Geany package itself in that amount would need a
> re-review for the Geany package in Fedora.
>

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?

> 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). 
  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.

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.

Cheers,
Matthew Brush

> Regards,
> Dominic
>
> [1] https://github.com/geany
> [2] http://download.geany.org/contrib/tags/
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Geany mailing list
> Geany at uvena.de
> https://lists.uvena.de/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geany