Re: [Tcllib-devel] Tcllib - Reopened discussion on what packages to put into it.

[Andreas K. <and...@ac...>]

> Andreas Kupries wrote:
> > Current state
> > 	Tcl-only packages which depen only on tcl, or other
> Tcl-only packages of
> > this type.
>
> Is it true that currently a package can go into tcllib only
> if all of its dependencies are either distributed with Tcl
> (msgcat, http, registry, etc.) or are also part of tcllib?

The way I phrased it it could depend on a Tcl-only package not in Tcllib.
However the way you explain it is most likely more true when I think about
it.

> If that's not correct, what is a counter-example?
>
> > Proposed by Aaron:
> > 	Relax the restrictions to allow dependency on non-optional
> C packages.
>
> The question is a bit on the abstract side.  For sake of
> concreteness, what is the short list of packages currently
> being excluded from tcllib that would be allowed into tcllib
> with the policy change?

Calling Rockshox, phone for you ...

He mentioned some on the chat however the names I remember, like 'TclSDL',
have already their own SF project (http://wiki.tcl.tk/14414,
http://simpledevlib.sourceforge.net).


> I think I like the idea.  Some folks seem concerned about
> shipping a distribution where some small fraction of the included
> packages won't work out of the box for some small fraction of
> downloaders.  To mitigate that, perhaps a refinement would be that
> a package can go into tcllib only if all its dependencies are
> distributed as part of ActiveTcl?

I could live with that, however, could others accept this dependency on a
distribution by a commercial entity, even if it is free like ActiveTcl ?
Remember, there are redistribution restrictions on it.

--
	Andreas Kupries <and...@Ac...>
	Developer @ http://www.ActiveState.com
	Tel: +1 778-786-1122