RE: Priorities
On 18-Jun-2002 Jeff Bailey wrote:
> When perusing debian-devel recently, I noticed an email indicating
> that one of my packages, mailutils, has the wrong priority (Perhaps
> ones day I'll understand why people talk about bugs instead of simply
> filing them... *sigh*)
>
> So my question is, How are priority important and required selected?
> In this case mailutils conflicts with mailx and is not a 100% suitable
> replacement yet, so there's no worries. But, I'm planning on
> uploading GNU inetutils soon. These should certainly be priority:
> required/important on hurd-i386 - netkit doesn't build on anything
> other than GNU/Linux and has no intention of it. I'd also like to see
> Inetutils considered for being the default in a year or so (when we
> finish tightening it up) since it's intended to be compiled on many
> systems (so is suitable for GNU/Hurd and the BSD Port).
>
debian policy manual, section 2.2.
inetutils or mailutils sounds destined to live in 'optional' forever. our
current setup does not allow for 'standard' in one and 'optional' in another
without having two (or more) sources.
P.S. great sig, I tracked down the original mail to have the surrounding
comments. its funny, blackbox's workspaces are implemented in yet another way
(-:
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: