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

Re: Status of circulars dependencies in unstable

On 09/05/2011 10:13 PM, Bill Allombert wrote:
>> Le samedi 03 septembre 2011 à 11:54 +0200, Bill Allombert a écrit : 
>>> Today circular dependencies in unstable reached an all-time low, with
>>> only 40 circular dependencies.
>> I think it should now be clear that there aren’t any such issues that
>> cannot be fixed, with more or less complication.
>> Given the benefits for dependency resolvers to be able to guarantee the
>> dependency tree is actually a tree and not a DAG, isn’t it time to start
>> mandating this in the policy? I also wonder whether it would be possible
>> to check for these circular dependencies in britney (if it’s relevant).
> As a start, what I suggest is to handle circular depends the same way as Pre-Depends:
>      You should not specify a `Pre-Depends' entry for a package before this
>      has been discussed on the `debian-devel' mailing list and a consensus
>      about doing that has been reached.
> i.e to require a consensus on debian-devel.

We are so large now with so many packages that I would prefer to reduce the
number of opportunities to be involved in any decision making over other
peoples' packages. Just sum up all the time that is wasted alone by deleting
the email by its subject line.

Your effort works fine, from what I observe. Good agreements on
the list. People do things. You are down to mostly peripheral packages that
seem mostly non-trivial and hence are not immediately fixed.

Sounds all very nice to me.


Reply to: