Re: Intent To Split: netbase

[Decklin Foster <decklin@red-bean.com>]

Anthony Towns writes:

> Well, if you wanted half the people running unstable to just
> blithely upgrade and have all their firewalling disappear, you could
> remove the dependencies, I guess.

The argument for getting rid of all the stuff still lying around in
netbase is that once the package really is a dummy ``this-only-exists-
so-that-people-can-upgrade-easily'' package, then it can be removed,
getting rid of the dependency on what the user doesn't want to
install. Right now we can't do that, which I what I think Alex's point
was.

[to Alex:]

Of course you can't just do this all at once. Right now the split-out
packages are availible and working; *now* we can go fix the other
packages that depend on netbase and move the remaining files
elsewhere.  I don't really care if I have to leave ipchains/ipfwdadm
on my machine for another month; they were there anyway. Have patience
and remember that we should at least try to provide a clean upgrade
path for people who run unstable but don't update every day (or week).

> Dependencies will start getting rearranged in a month or so, I
> guess.

I don't think this is right. Remember that when woody is released,
people are going to be upgrading from the potato netbase from the
woody netbase. netbase should continue to depend on whatever it
provided then.

-- 
There is no TRUTH. There is no REALITY. There is no CONSISTENCY. There
are no ABSOLUTE STATEMENTS. I'm very probably wrong. -- BSD fortune(6)