Re: Bug#19920: Packages Optional, should be Extra
On Thu, 19 Mar 1998, Marcus Brinkmann wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 19, 1998 at 06:02:54PM +0000, Ian Jackson wrote:
> > I think we should indeed have such a new priority level. I like the
> > label `preferred'.
Another possibility could be `recommended'.
> > This should include the `best example' of everything, or several
> > examples if there is no clear best and both are in widespread use.
> > It should not include any electronic texts not related to computers
> > (so doc-rfc is OK, but not bible-kjv et al) and no journals.
>
> Agreed. I'm not sure if you are aiming to make "preferred" the new
> "optional", or if you want "optional" to be the main section and move
> selected packages to "preferred". For simplicity, I would suggest the latter.
I think that you should make preferred/recommended a subset of optional;
packages would only be in preferred/recommended when there are a number of
packages that provide the same or similiar functionality. Typically thaey
are "best of breed" applications.
"best of breed" could be related to its security, popularity, funkyiness,
etc.
> But this raises a lot of new questions. A few come to mind very
> quickly:
>
> * What should be the text that defines the difference between preferred and
> optional (for example, in the policy)?
How about: "preferred/recommended: these packages have been selected as
``best of breed'' from amonst those already in the optional area. The
characterics may be as wide ranging as security, popularity, ease of use
and just plain coolness."
And perhaps a slight modification to the definition of optional too?
> * What is the definition of "best example"? Technical suprior, most bug
> free, most established, easy to use (I don't think this very last should be
> the definition. We should have a de*ty preselected bunch of packages esp.
> for beginners). Probably a mix of all, and the current state of
> maintenance and the activity of the upstream development.
Yes, all of the above criteria and more. I can't think of a good way to
decide if a package is the "best example"; perhaps this could be voted
upon once/if Debian adopts a constitution.
> * What about games? I tend to never make them preferred, but fortune? nethack?
> What is a Linux system without fortune cookies ;)
With my attempt of a definition above, you'd only have things in
`recommend' when multiple functional alternatives exist (e.g. a web
server) and one (or more) are clearly superior. Whatever the last two
words mean.
[snip - sounds like a good list to start from]
Anand.
--
`When any government, or any church for that matter, undertakes to say to
its subjects, "This you may not read, this you must not see, this you are
forbidden to know," the end result is tyranny and oppression no matter how
holy the motives' -- Robert A Heinlein, "If this goes on --"
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-policy-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: