Re: ITR: febootstrap
Y Giridhar Appaji Nag <appaji@debian.org> writes:
> I agree with this particular example. But I could argue if would
> "reasonbly want to install" Kerberos if I "Didn't know what it was".
>
> I've not seen ftp-master enforce the distinction between optional and
> extra, not even in the cases where it is very clearly defined in
> policy i.e. extra "contains all packages that conflict with others
> with required, important, standard or optional priorities". And in
> case of "Packages must not depend on packages with lower priority
> values (excluding build-time dependencies).". Look at the Debcheck
> pages.
>
> I am not sure if enforcing "extra" in cases other than conflicts,
> Depends: on lower priority and very clear specialised requirements
> (elinks-lite, debug symbols etc.) gains us much.
Oh, yes, I agree. I wouldn't go to people in general and ask them to
make their packages priority: extra. I was only questioning because
you'd said to raise the priority from extra to optional, and this didn't
seem like a package where we'd want to make a special effort to move it
into optional.
--
Russ Allbery (rra@debian.org) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
Reply to: