Re: RFC: relaxation of debian-emacs-policy dependency requirements
Rob Browning writes ("Re: RFC: relaxation of debian-emacs-policy dependency requirements"):
> If the package doesn't need to use any of the emacsen-common build
> infrastructure (doesn't need to byte-compile for each flavor, etc.),
> then it doesn't need to have any emacsen-related dependencies -- that's
> already in policy.
Ah, yes, (5) of the Emacs policy. Perhaps the wossname-el packages
are being invented by maintainers who haven't read that part ?
Packages which seem to be affected include
uim-el (which also seems to be mistakenly "Architecture: any")
 I searched lenny for binary packages whose names ended in .el,
which seemed to come from a non-emacs-related source package. This is
a surprisingly short list. There were 48 binary packages ending in
-el but mostly they seem to come from dedicated source packages.
Perhaps it would be sensible to give some quantitative guidance in the
Emacs policy and/or just file bugs on those packages ?