[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Metapackages in "Section: metapackages" or not (Was: visibility of Debian Pure Blends)

On 27.10.2014 11:04, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> Quoting Andreas Tille (2014-10-27 07:19:27)
>> On Sun, Oct 26, 2014 at 10:06:50PM +0100, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
>>> Quoting Andreas Tille (2014-10-26 17:17:37)
>>>> It is not mandatory by blends-dev.  [implementation details skipped] 
>>>> For me it becomes more and more evident that we need to discuss more 
>>>> on this list about needs of different Blends and how to correctly 
>>>> implement this.
>>> Well, one reason for lack of discussion in the past is that (as far 
>>> as I am aware) only one tool for creating blends have existed: 
>>> blends-dev.
>> I see it differently.  I would have loved to discuss about features of 
>> blends-dev but the responses in the past tended to be zero.  Not even 
>> bug reports about features were filed.  So I try to "overhear" what 
>> might be needed and #720199 was the actual motivation to implement the 
>> feature to add "Section: metapackages".
> I am not surprised that you are blind to the reason I bring up.
> Or do you mean to say that you disagree that being a reason at all?  
> Feels odd to me if you argue that my reason for staying silent is not a 
> reason.  Perhaps you mean it is a reason you disapprove of?

I think you misunderstood Andreas statement above and sensed something
negative which wasn't there in the first place. Although I am quite new
to the project, I have no doubt that all Blends projects could discuss
any kind of problems with the tools on this list and find a solution
that benefits them all. However to start any kind of improvement you
must be aware of that something needs to be addressed. That's the simple
quintessence of the above paragraph.

For me and Debian Games blends-dev just works. I can also live with
Section: metapackages because it seems to be the obvious place for
metapackages. When I want to remove all packages in one go, I run
»apt-mark auto <metapackage«.

It is quite understandable that different people and projects have
different needs but I don't see a reason why we could not discuss flaws
in blends-dev and try to fix them, so that all projects will see
improvements not only a single one.



Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Reply to: