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

Bug#727708: Please clarify L options with regard to interfaces


There seems to be a significant conflict within the TC about what the L
options mean.  Speaking as a maintainer who could be affected by this
and as someone who would sponsor a GR to override one interpretation
butnot another, I'd request that the TC clarify what it means with the
next ballot options.

* Colin said that it would be OK to depend on a stable interface such as
  logind-208 provided that multiple implementations could exist.

* Ian said that this dependency would not be OK.

I'd like the ballot options to clarify:

1) Whether these interface dependencies are acceptable

2) Whether they are acceptable in cases where there is only one

I'd request the TC consider the following question although I'm not sure
going into this level of detail on the ballot is appropriate:

3) If we are using virtual packages to define interfaces, what should
the dependency look like?  Would you want a raw virtual dependency such
as gnome-shell depends on logind-208?  If so, isn't that kind of not how
we currently recommend things?  Or a concrete dependency like
systemd|logind-208?  If so, please make sure that if such interface
dependencies are permitted your policy text actually permits the

Thanks for your consideration,


Reply to: