Re: [SCM] science branch, master, updated. 62a9741420de5201ef8c55e8db751b3709150359
Paul Wise <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> On Tue, Apr 5, 2016 at 10:16 PM, Ole Streicher wrote:
>> Andreas Tille writes:
>>> I think the change of priority from extra to optional is wrong. Per
>>> policy packages with priority optional can not Depend / Recommend
>>> packages with priority extra. Since we have no way to control the
>>> priority of all dependencies the metapackages should remain at priority
>>> extra. Alternatively the every single priority of metapackages needs
>>> to be set explicitly.
>> OK, that is a good point; I didn' think on it. I'll just revert the
>> Priority to extra for the moment.
> IIRC the plan for optional/extra was to delete extra entirely. No idea
> what happened to that idea.
What was the alternative to deal with conflicting packages?