Re: Getting rid of circular dependencies
On 6/24/05, Peter Samuelson <email@example.com> wrote:
> [Bill Allombert]
> > The `Depends' field should be used if the depended-on package is
> > required for the depending package to provide a significant
> > amount of functionality.
> I'd say if a -data package is useless without its corresponding binary
> package, that fits this definition just fine. Policy does not specify
> *why* a package might fail to provide significant functionality without
> the presence of something else. (Unless you wish to argue that -data
> packages provide no functionality, which seems a pretty arbitrary
> definition of 'functionality'.)
I'd argue for exactly that.
What functionality would you say a data package provides?
It's the other package that provides the functionality, not the data
package. The data package shouldn't even have to know about the other