Re: Packages file [WAS: Splitting Packages]
On Mon, 1 Apr 2002, Otto Wyss wrote:
> > But since priority and essential is something different in concept I would
> > rather stick to the existing solution. Let alone the fact that the
> > "Essential:" tag applies to only 24 Packages at the moment, so removing
> > that tag wouldn't result in much gain besides confusion for the user.
> Why are all packages decided by the priority except the essential?
To compare it with coding: It's like spending two variables when one would
suffice. You lose little but your code is (probably) easier to understand.
> Why introduce another concept if the current would suffice? Why not
> remove a concept which is fully supported by a more generalized
You got some things confused here ;) Your (or Fabios) concept would
suffice, the existing is more general.
Jens (on his way to Austria)
ruehmkorf at informatik dot uni hyphen koeln dot de
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to firstname.lastname@example.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact email@example.com