Hi, On 01.06.2013 21:24, Russ Allbery wrote: > Well, you gain some reduced complexity for end users if the modules are > almost always used together (it avoids problems where they get one module > installed and not the other), and it reduces the size of the package list > a tiny bit. Yes, but you also get the same maintainer script enabling both at the same time, even if you are the only person on earth not using them together and you don't want to do so either [*]. > That said, the more I think about it, the more I think I should just go > ahead and split those modules; they're always used together at Stanford, > but in the broader community it's not as clear they would be this tightly > linked. So I'm going to go ahead and close this bug after further > consideration. If someone else runs into the same problem, they can > always reopen or open their own bug. I don't think we should discuss this based on your particular use case. For the single case, there are always overrides when needed. I'm grateful you raised this issue and I'm not at all against implementing your suggestion but I think we should do discuss it at a rather generic level. If you believe, this is an issue to be fixed at a global level we should still discuss it here. [*] That said, we allow people to override maintainer scripts now if you use apache2-maintscript-helper. -- with kind regards, Arno Töll IRC: daemonkeeper on Freenode/OFTC GnuPG Key-ID: 0x9D80F36D
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature