Re: Bug#90867: Menu is more important than it would seem
On Sat, 24 Mar 2001, Steve Greenland wrote:
> On 24-Mar-01, 16:00 (CST), Malcolm Parsons
> <malcolm@ivywell.screaming.net> wrote:
> > I agree, menu is one of the great features of debian (along with
> > alternatives, doc-base, and the mime stuff). It should be Priority:
> > standard,
>
> Yes.
I don't think so, menus don't work intuitively enough to be standard,
considering that a major point of their existence is to make things more
intuitive. They often require window manager restarts to work after
package installation/removal, which is generally a confusing suprise to
users who depend on menus. They should not be enshrined as standard.
Britton
> > and any package containing a menu-method should Recommend: menu.
>
> No. If a person goes out of their way to remove "menu" (which they would
> have to do if it goes to priority "standard"), then they are going to be
> exceedingly annoyed when dselect (or whatever) keeps trying to install
> it, or keeps asking them about it.
>
> The definition of "recommends" is
>
> This declares a strong, but not absolute, dependency.
>
> The `Recommends' field should list packages that would be found
> together with this one in all but unusual installations.
>
> (Debian Policy manual, S 7.2)
>
> Package's use of the menu package hardly meets this definition. Menus
> are a neat feature that should be supported by any package that can use
> them, but I can't think of any package whose functionality is in anyway
> enhanced by the use of the menu package.
>
> Steve
>
> --
> Steve Greenland <stevegr@debian.org>
> (Please do not CC me on mail sent to this list; I subscribe to and read
> every list I post to.)
>
Reply to: