[Slackbuilds-users] Jack policy
klaatu at member.fsf.org
Sat Dec 14 08:06:02 UTC 2019
On Friday, December 13, 2019 11:53:36 AM B Watson wrote:
> On 11/28/19, Franzen <slackbuilds at schoepfer.info> wrote:
> > The previous posts showed that there is no better or discontinued jack,
> > to make a dependeing build work both seem to do the job.
> > For now, i'll change my builds to jack-audio-connection-kit, maybe the
> > last two other builds from other maintainer follow.
> I'm the maintainer of both jack builds, I've been going through my (and
> some other peoples') builds that depend on jack-audio-connection-kit
> and checking them with jack2 instead.
> Here's my idea of what to do: in the READMEs for both
> jack-audio-connection-kit and jack2, put a prominent notice that
> says something like "Note: jack2 is a direct drop-in replacement for
> jack-audio-connection-kit", and a short explanation of the differences.
> Since there's no || operator in REQUIRES (and there probably
> never will be), users will have to learn that any time they see
> jack-audio-connection-kit as a dependency, jack2 can be used instead.
> It's not ideal, but it would be way more confusing for some builds
> to list jack-audio-connection-kit and others to list jack2 (literal
> following of the deps would mean they'd be mutually exclusive, when
> they're actually not).
> Willy, and other reviewers, can I ask you guys to *not* put jack2 in
> REQUIRES? For consistency, if you have to add one of the jacks as a dep,
> add jack-audio-connection-kit. Anyone who's paying attention and reading
> the READMEs will see that they could use jack2 instead... and anyone
> NOT paying attention will end up with the older JACK, but at least it
> will work.
> SlackBuilds-users mailing list
> SlackBuilds-users at slackbuilds.org
> Archives - https://lists.slackbuilds.org/pipermail/slackbuilds-users/
> FAQ - https://slackbuilds.org/faq/
I agree that consistency is better than inconsistency.
However, I don't agree that jack-audio-connection-kit should be the implied
Why not just put the %README% flag and not list JACK at all in REQUIRES? That
way, people are prompted to make their own decision.
I don't use any kind of dependency resolution parser, so I don't know how that
would affect automated dependency tools, but I assume when they encounter a
%README% flag they throw up a notice to the user. Besides, we make it clear
that SBo doesn't support auto dependency resolvers anyway (and as I recall
REQUIRES in .info was us throwing a bone to such tools in the first place, so
we shouldn't feel like we have to make decisions based on their ability to
remove decisions from the user).
More information about the SlackBuilds-users