GNU bug report logs - #38570
[PATCH 1/2] gnu: Add gx-plugins-lv2.

Previous Next

To reply to this bug, email your comments to 38570 AT debbugs.gnu.org.

Toggle the display of automated, internal messages from the tracker.

Message #5 received at submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Alexandros Theodotou <alex <at> zrythm.org>
To: Guix patches <guix-patches <at> gnu.org>
Subject: [PATCH 1/2] gnu: Add gx-plugins-lv2.
Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2019 01:14:03 +0000

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Hi,

I deleted many gx-* packages since upstream provides a meta-repository
for them. FWIW Arch does the same:
https://www.archlinux.org/packages/community/x86_64/gxplugins.lv2/

Thanks,
Alex

[0001-gnu-Add-gx-plugins-lv2.patch (text/x-patch, attachment)]

[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, inline)]

Message #8 received at 38570 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Ricardo Wurmus <rekado <at> elephly.net>
To: Alexandros Theodotou <alex <at> zrythm.org>
Cc: 38570 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: [bug#38570] [PATCH 1/2] gnu: Add gx-plugins-lv2.
Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2019 10:11:42 +0100

Hi Alexandros,

> I deleted many gx-* packages since upstream provides a meta-repository
> for them. FWIW Arch does the same:
> https://www.archlinux.org/packages/community/x86_64/gxplugins.lv2/

I think it’s better to err on the side of granularity here and provide
the lv2 plugins as individual packages.

We could have a meta package that simply propagates all of the
individual packages.

-- 
Ricardo

Message #11 received at 38570 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Alexandros Theodotou <alex <at> zrythm.org>
To: Ricardo Wurmus <rekado <at> elephly.net>
Cc: 38570 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: [bug#38570] [PATCH 1/2] gnu: Add gx-plugins-lv2.
Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2019 10:13:55 +0000

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Hi Ricardo,

Thanks for taking a look at this.

On Thu, 2019-12-12 at 10:11 +0100, Ricardo Wurmus wrote:
> 
> I think it’s better to err on the side of granularity here and
> provide
> the lv2 plugins as individual packages.
> 
> We could have a meta package that simply propagates all of the
> individual packages.

I think this is a very bad idea in this case, considering:
a) No one will ever want to install specific gxplugins. Usually people
want to install the "gxplugin suite" - or even all available LV2
plugins
b) There are !!!!!!43!!!!!! plugins here. Do you realize how painful
and unnecessary it would be to add and maintain these packages?
Especially considering the following point
c) The total installed file size for all of these is only 7mb
d) These are all from the same person, who explicitly provides a meta-
repository for packagers so it makes sense to offer them in the same
package

If you insist though, I would likely just use my own channel for this
as I don't want to go through the trouble of adding 40 extra packages,
each only a few KB in size.

Thanks,
Alex

[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, inline)]

Message #14 received at 38570 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Alexandros Theodotou <alex <at> zrythm.org>
To: Ricardo Wurmus <rekado <at> elephly.net>
Cc: 38570 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: [bug#38570] [PATCH 1/2] gnu: Add gx-plugins-lv2.
Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2020 15:35:37 +0000

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Hi Ricardo,

I apologize for my tone in the last message, it sounded like I was
yelling at you. Would you still prefer to package these separately? It
would need 43 new packages which isn't very efficient or worth the
effort in my opinion considering that they are mostly very
small/minimal plugins.

Also, it would be great if you could have a look at this meta-package
patch for installing all available lv2-plugins: 
https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=38571 .

Thanks,
Alex

On Thu, 2019-12-12 at 10:13 +0000, Alexandros Theodotou wrote:
> Hi Ricardo,
> 
> Thanks for taking a look at this.
> 
> On Thu, 2019-12-12 at 10:11 +0100, Ricardo Wurmus wrote:
> > I think it’s better to err on the side of granularity here and
> > provide
> > the lv2 plugins as individual packages.
> > 
> > We could have a meta package that simply propagates all of the
> > individual packages.
> 
> I think this is a very bad idea in this case, considering:
> a) No one will ever want to install specific gxplugins. Usually
> people
> want to install the "gxplugin suite" - or even all available LV2
> plugins
> b) There are !!!!!!43!!!!!! plugins here. Do you realize how painful
> and unnecessary it would be to add and maintain these packages?
> Especially considering the following point
> c) The total installed file size for all of these is only 7mb
> d) These are all from the same person, who explicitly provides a
> meta-
> repository for packagers so it makes sense to offer them in the same
> package
> 
> If you insist though, I would likely just use my own channel for this
> as I don't want to go through the trouble of adding 40 extra
> packages,
> each only a few KB in size.
> 
> Thanks,
> Alex

[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, inline)]

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.