Re: [PROPOSED] Change package relations policy to remove references to non-free from main

[Raul Miller <moth@debian.org>]

>  >> If, e.g, my package can take advantage of Netscape, then it should
>  >> be the responsibility of my package, not Netscape, to mention that
>  >> fact. Otherwise, Netscape (in particular) may need to have hundreds
>  >> of packages listed under "Enhances". Not to mention that fact that it
>  >> may require new uploads of Netscape simply to add or remove packages
>  >> from Netscape's "Enhances" field. That's simply not a good or sensible
>  >> design. It may be ok for gimp-nonfree or tetex-nonfree, where the
>  >> "Enhances" is for one-and-only-one package, but it doesn't work for
>  >> the great majority of cases.

Raul Miller <moth@debian.org> writes:
>  Raul> That's solvable:  create a virtual package which has a free instance
>  Raul> (such as Mozilla) which provides the interface you're taking advantage of.

On Tue, Nov 30, 1999 at 01:21:22PM -0600, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>         This is an additional hack to cover the hack that people are
>  proposing. Enhances is a legitimate dependency, as is suggests, but
>  niether are really what is reqwuired to hide non-free from people who
>  do not want to see it.

Actually, this particular case has nothing to do with Enhances.

Re-read the above text.  It looks to me as if you're saying it's right
to say suggest netscape and not suggest a virtual package which both
mozilla and netscape provide.

And we still don't have a good example case where "free package suggests
non-free package" is better than "non-free package enhances free package"

-- 
Raul