Re: Bug#758234: it's actively harmful

[Matthias Urlichs <matthias@urlichs.de>]

Hi,

Santiago Vila:
> Maybe because current policy allows one to take the following set of packages:
> 
> + Packages of required priority.
> * Packages of important or higher priority.
> * Packages of standard or higher priority.
> 
> and all those sets are self-consistent (i.e. they don't have
> dependencies outside the set).
> 
> I think this is a useful and nice property, but I don't know how many
> people rely on it.
> 
It certainly is useful to have these sets of packages IMHO.

But the work to keep the priorities consistent is not useful when you
already have a tool that adds them (and nothing else) to a set of packages
when you need it, as opposed to "when ftpadmin gets around to updating the
override file".

> Minor clarification: Essential is a flag, not a priority.
> 
*Oops* Thanks.

-- 
-- Matthias Urlichs