Re: Raising priority of Debian packages
Gerrit Pape <pape@dbnbgs.smarden.org> writes:
> On Sat, Aug 30, 2014 at 09:30:17AM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
>> Also, I'll reiterate what I said on debian-policy on this topic: the
>> current Policy discussion of priorities is deceptive, since it implies
> I don't think the discussion on the issue I raised is deceptive
The point that I'm making here is that you're talking about RC bugs
against packages, but, one, priority conflicts are not RC, and two,
priorities are not determined by packages. They're determined by
ftp-master. So I think you're barking up entirely the wrong tree by
trying to use the machinery of RC bugs to address the problem that you're
concerned with.
This feels very much to me like a specific problem (you disagree with
rsyslog depending on init-system-helpers) that has been abstracted into a
generalized issue with priorities. There are general issues with
priorities, but I don't think they are as urgent as figuring out exactly
what we want to do about init-system-helpers and its additional Perl
module dependencies, since we've been living with those issues for a very
long time.
The problem that set off this entire discussion is the question of whether
we want to raise the priority of perl, perl-modules, and
init-system-helpers to important to match rsyslog, move the Perl modules
used by init-system-helpers to perl-core (thereby adding them to
Essential), or take some third course of action. That's well worth
discussing in a broader context, and I feel like trying to phrase that
question as a general discussion of the role of priorities in Debian is
not very helpful in starting that discussion.
--
Russ Allbery (rra@debian.org) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
Reply to: