>> I would still want that multi-arch dependencies would be specified at >> one straight place, not two. > > For most things it will be the depended on package. Your suggestion > would make it always be in 2 places (co-installability in the library, > depends in the dependee). I think the proposed way and having it in > 90-99% only in the depended on package is better. Sure. I don't want to have to mix co-installability which is a property of package and depends which is not a property of package to one field. My proposal defines very simple logic for maintainers of reverse depends, opposing to your. It has discussed drawback too, of course. That's all my arguments. -- Eugene V. Lyubimkin aka JackYF, JID: jackyf.devel(maildog)gmail.com C++/Perl developer, Debian Maintainer
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature