On Sat, Jul 10, 2004 at 10:07:35PM +1000, Matthew Palmer wrote: > I don't think that the basis for a package's inclusion in main should be the > packaging in main of appropriate content. The Debian Policy says something pretty close to that, in my view. 2.2.1 The main section Every package in main and non-US/main must comply with the DFSG (Debian Free Software Guidelines). In addition, the packages in main * must not require a package outside of main for compilation or execution (thus, the package must not declare a "Depends", "Recommends", or "Build-Depends" relationship on a non-main package), * must not be so buggy that we refuse to support them, and * must meet all policy requirements presented in this manual. Similarly, the packages in non-US/main * must not require a package outside of main or non-US/main for compilation or execution, * must not be so buggy that we refuse to support them, * must meet all policy requirements presented in this manual. OTOH, as you're sure to note, an easy way around this is that a package can be completely useless in main as long as what it depends on isn't a package. Maybe that *was* your point. > That would be a waste of archive resources. Er, before heading down this road, I think you should attempt an objective demonstration that we seem to give a damn about wasting archive resources in the first place. -- G. Branden Robinson | Optimists believe we live in the Debian GNU/Linux | best of all possible worlds. email@example.com | Pessimists fear that this really is http://people.debian.org/~branden/ | the best of all possible worlds.
Description: Digital signature