Re: Size of Optional - policy and name for new Priority
This is a good idea, but rather than introduce a new priority, I
propose that we loosen the definitions of the higher priorities.
Currently we have
Essential (a de-facto priority composed of those packages with the
Essential flag on)
If our intent is that practically all systems install Standard and
higher, do we really need four tiers there? Let's broaden important
so it includes our current standard software and redefine standard as
Ian suggested the new priority be defined.