Re: Recommends for metapackages

[Abou Al Montacir <abou.almontacir@sfr.fr>]

On Thu, 2012-07-12 at 11:09 +0200, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> On 12-07-12 at 10:28am, Abou Al Montacir wrote:
> > I'm maintaining a package which upstream delivers as all in one 
> > (600MB) and refuses to support splitting. I've split it into 22 
> > packages because I know and got requests from users who want to have 
> > it in machines with small disks and/or low internet.
>
> I guess you are referring to lazarus.
>
> <sarcasm>
> Oh horror: The meta-package lazarus-0.9.30.4 forces 70MB of 
> documentation down my throat!  That's not freedom of choice, that is 
> outragous!  That package should only recommend its dependencies, for 
> those 1-2% custom users needing the convenience of the meta-package 
> without the burden og that documentation part.
> </sarcasm>
Yes, but as you can see lazarus-ide-0.9.30.4 does not pull them. 
And even lazarus-0.9.30.4, which is intended for a typical Lazarus installation (equiv gnome) is not forcing fpc, as you may want, to use it with gpc or even gcc (I doubt it could, but you can try why forcing a compiler?)

> As with any package available in Debian: Just don't install it if you do 
> not like what the package does!
>
> It really is that simple!
I think that we really do not have the same understanding of metapackage. You clearly want them strict and non flexible, I want them convenient and flexible while ensuring desired functionality.

This does not end at gnome dependency but is really a general issue as stated in other mails of this thread.

I really hate forcing things if not needed, just like the nature, have minimal set of constraints, but ensure they got honored everywhere they are relevant. Especially avoid dpakg --force-depends.

Cheers,