Hi. (springing back to existence after a lot of time in the obscurity; I cannot guarantee that I'll remain in existence for long, so feel free to override my opinion) Il 11/05/2013 11:16, Joachim Breitner ha scritto: >> So all three use cases are supported, and our users happy. >> >> What do you think – should Debian employ such methods, or not? If not, >> why not? > > So, do you think that our Users would benefit from this scheme? Is it > understandable? Or not worth the effort? Personally, I would consider that more in the side of abusing than of using dependencies. I don't think that the proliferation of virtual packages is a good idea; instead, this problem would be better solved by writing a script that checks and enforces the strategy selected by the user. If other teams feel the need of some "installed packages policy enforcer" like this, APT developers may consider to add provisions to APT to automatically perform this kind of checks. This way we do not encumber the packages space (which, among other things, would have the nice side-effect of slowing down package management for users of less powerful systems, which maybe don't even care about Haskell packages) and solve the same problem in a more clean and understandable way. Giovanni. -- Giovanni Mascellani <mascellani@poisson.phc.unipi.it> Pisa, Italy Web: http://poisson.phc.unipi.it/~mascellani Jabber: g.mascellani@jabber.org / giovanni@elabor.homelinux.org
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature