On Tue, Mar 07, 2017 at 04:40:15PM +0000, Ian Jackson wrote: [...] > I would like to shelve this suggestion. The concept of > antimetapackages can certainly be used this way from a technical point > of view, but I think the goal there is controversial. Maintainers of > packages currently in main would probably resist the introduction of > antimetapackage tags. > > Whereas the goal of enabling finer control over nonfree is, I think, > fairly uncontroversial. I'm not so sure whether this goal is uncontroversial, this is Debian… ;) > So do you think we should proceed with that ? Please not like this. while I *might* share the goal, I think this implementation is IMHO rather horrible. "antimetapackages" sounds unclear at best and the whole concept is *way* too complicated. plus, we have something complicated which can achieve the wanted effect today already: apt pining. I think Debian has better things to do than working on fine grained control over non-free stuff. Obviously anybody is free to work on this, but I dont think we should make our repositories, packages, policies and workflow soooo much more complicated and harder to understand, for very little gain. -- cheers, Holger
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature