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

Re: apt-listchanges (Re: Advice on how best to handle non-backwards compatibility)

On Wed, 2004-01-07 at 17:23, Matt Zimmerman wrote:

> On Wed, Jan 07, 2004 at 04:53:26PM +0000, Colin Watson wrote:
> > On Wed, Jan 07, 2004 at 03:58:18PM +0100, Adrian 'Dagurashibanipal' von Bidder wrote:
> > > I hate debconf notices, personally. I feel this is exactly a case for
> > > NEWS.Debian (yes, I'm a happy apt-listchanges user... - IMHO that tool
> > > belongs installed by default).
> > 
> > While I think NEWS.Debian is the right approach, the fact that
> > apt-listchanges isn't installed by default is deterring me from relying
> > on it. I'd like this not to be the case in the long term.
> > 
> > Is apt-listchanges still not installed by default in sarge? If not, why
> > not?
> For the same reason that other packages that sometimes seem like a good idea
> by default are not.  That is, they don't meet the definition for Priority:
> standard.
I would've thought that if debconf meets the definition of 'standard' or
'important' (it's Priority), apt-listchanges (in the NEWS.Debian role)
merits equal status.

Have you ever, ever felt like this?
Had strange things happen?  Are you going round the twist?

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Reply to: