Re: potential MBF: first alternate depends not available in main

[Carsten Hey <carsten@debian.org>]

* Paul Wise [2011-03-04 12:54 +0800]:
> On Thu, Mar 3, 2011 at 10:28 PM, Carsten Hey <carsten@debian.org> wrote:
>
> >> But, anyway, I believe that the first depends of an alternate depends relation
> >> should be available in main and propose to file bugs about this.
> >>
> >> Do you agree this warrants a mass bug filing? I couldn't find this written out
> >> in policy ...
> >
> > If the is a consensus, it could be added to the developer's reference or the policy.
>
> Debian Policy section 2.2.1 already covers this:
>
> ...the package must not declare a "Depends", "Recommends", or
> "Build-Depends" relationship on a non-main package.
>
> http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-archive.html#s-main

This can be read in different ways:

 * All of the alternatives must be in main.
 * The first alternative must be in main.
 * One of the alternatives must be in main.

Before the Ubuntu main inclusion requirements had been clarified in
January, they have at least once wrongly been read as "All of ...".

There are many dependencies on, e.g., openjdk-6-jre | sun-java6-jre, in
Debian which would violate policy if all of the alternatives would need
to be in main.

I hope we agree that the first mentioned way to read this section is not
how the current policy should be interpreted and think that
a clarification could improve the policy.


Regards
Carsten