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

Re: Possible mass bug filing: non-doc packages recommending doc packages

On Fri, May 08, 2009 at 10:14:05AM +0200, Frank Lin PIAT wrote:
> While I support the effort to reduce disk space usage, I strongly
> disagree with this proposal.
> A software is worth nothing without appropriate documentation.

No, that's subjective, with the subject being the package
maintainer. If the maintainer considered the software "worth nothing"
without doc, he could have (in the past) marked the -doc package as
*dependency* as that was the only way in the past to have it installed
by default.

I don't think that the mere fact that we changed the default behavior
of apt-get/aptitude should get in the way of that maintainer's
choice. If we used to live in a world where, by maintainer choice, doc
was not installed by default, that world should IMO stay the same.

That is why I interpret the spirit of the proposal, and that is why
I'm in favor of it.

Just my 0.02€,

Stefano Zacchiroli -o- PhD in Computer Science \ PostDoc @ Univ. Paris 7
zack@{upsilon.cc,pps.jussieu.fr,debian.org} -<>- http://upsilon.cc/zack/
Dietro un grande uomo c'è ..|  .  |. Et ne m'en veux pas si je te tutoie
sempre uno zaino ...........| ..: |.... Je dis tu à tous ceux que j'aime

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: