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

Re: Building GTK programs without installing dconf-service?



Quoting Simon McVittie (2019-08-16 11:00:37)
> On Fri, 16 Aug 2019 at 00:13:28 +0200, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> > Are you arguing that an installation where in-memory storage of 
> > config is fine is perhaps not an "unusual installation" but a 
> > "veeeeery super dooper weird installations" and therefore does not 
> > match Debian Policy about using Recommends?
> 
> Let's not polarize this into "either A or B is important and the other 
> is irrelevant". I am arguing that this is a situation where two 
> competing factors have to be balanced, and not a situation where one 
> of those factors is obviously much more important than the other:
> 
> * non-essential dependencies should be weakened to Recommends or 
>   Suggests to make the overall system more flexible;
> * users who change configuration should be able to rely on it not 
>   being lost
> 
> You have made a good point in favour of the first of those being 
> desirable, and I don't disagree; but however many times you say that, 
> it doesn't demonstrate consensus that the first of those factors is 
> more important than the second. (You are arguing that it is; Adam 
> seems to be suggesting that it isn't.)
> 
> If there *is* consensus that "don't lose user configuration" is less 
> important than "weaken dependencies where possible", then that's a 
> good reason to weaken the dependency, although in practice that is 
> likely to be wontfix until dh_installgsettings can do it. As far as I 
> can tell, this feature has not been supported or proposed in the 8 
> years since dh_installgsettings was added to debhelper, but I have now 
> opened a debhelper bug with a possible patch.
> 
> Policy is a tool to make the best software distribution we can by 
> documenting consensus, not an immutable holy book. If following the 
> letter of Policy implies making a change that (according to project 
> consensus) gives us a worse software distribution, then we should 
> change Policy instead.
> 
> I help to update GTK in the GNOME team, but I don't consider GTK to be 
> "my" package, and I am not going to overrule its primary maintainers 
> on decisions that I am not confident have consensus behind them.

Great points!

Thanks for your patience and clarity!!


 - Jonas

-- 
 * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt
 * Tlf.: +45 40843136  Website: http://dr.jones.dk/

 [x] quote me freely  [ ] ask before reusing  [ ] keep private

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: signature


Reply to: