Re: Editor Priorities
On Thu, May 09, 2002 at 11:08:29AM +1200, Nick Phillips wrote:
> There is an argument for a minus for non-free: if a user or group of users
> want to use that particular editor, the admin will (reluctantly) install
> it. But said admin would be mightily pissed-off if their previously
> highest-priority editor got replaced by some nasty non-free one.
Admin will be pissed off any way if installing an editor change anything in
the configured system, thsts why I think prios are flawed.
It is a good method to pick the initial alternative, but not to be
avaluated on each install/remove.
I know that this is hard to achieve with the current packaging system, but
personally I think it is more important than giving scores to software.
Greetings
Bernd
--
(OO) -- Bernd_Eckenfels@Wendelinusstrasse39.76646Bruchsal.de --
( .. ) ecki@{inka.de,linux.de,debian.org} http://home.pages.de/~eckes/
o--o *plush* 2048/93600EFD eckes@irc +497257930613 BE5-RIPE
(O____O) When cryptography is outlawed, bayl bhgynjf jvyy unir cevinpl!
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: