On Tue, Jan 26, 2010 at 12:49:46PM +0100, Julien Cristau wrote:
> I'd object to this. I believe apt-listchanges needs to be in the
> default install. If that means moving python-support and python-apt to
> standard as well, that sounds like a pretty cheap price to pay. So I
> think this bug should be downgraded and reassigned to ftp.d.o.
I concur with this position.
To give some more data, I've been looking at the details of what would
need additional promotion to priority standard, e.g. by transitivity.
python-support depends on:
python, dpkg
-> both are already at least priority standard, no issue here
python-apt depends *additionally* on:
python-central,
libapt-inst-libc6.9-6-1.1,
libapt-pkg-libc6.9-6-4.8,
libc6, libgcc1, libstdc++6
-> python-central is already priority standard
-> libapt-inst-libc6.9-6-1.1 is provided by apt-utils, which is
priority important (no issue then)
-> libapt-pkg-libc6.9-6-4.8 is provided by apt (again: no issue)
-> the latter 3 are obviously no issue
All in all (and unless I've missed something), the choice seems to be
relatively self contained. We would "just" need to promote to standard
python-support and python-apt. For reference, on amd64 the total
installed-size of the 2 is about 4 MB (not considering the *.pyc which
will be compiled on the fly by python-support, which I don't know how to
evaluate).
The only apparent resulting silliness of all this would be have two
python runtime helper in standard (-central and -support), but that's
already the case today on all real-life installations which require a
handful of Python application. We won't be adding much more by pushing
that to standard.
Cheers.
--
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