Re: [PROPOSED] Change package relations policy to remove references to non-free from main
Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@debian.org> writes:
> I do notthink it correct for emacs to suggest EUDC, but it is
> quite appropriate for EUDC to say it enhances emacs.
Actually, EUDC depends on emacs. I don't think emacs should suggest
EUDC (which is what "EUDC enhances emacs" would mean).
I have been unable to think of any actual legitimate use of enhances,
and you don't seem to be doing much better. OTOH, I agree that
enhances *by itself* is not a harmful suggestion, even if it's not a
useful one.
(Even for third-party packages, I'm hard-pressed to come up with an
actual use for enhances, but I do suspect that this is where it's
*most* likely to be useful, if anywhere.)
> As it stands, I agree to the enhanced proposal, but would
> object strongly to using enhances to remove mention of non-free
> packages from main (we should do it in dselect, dpkg, and apt; with
> the pacjkages not displaying non-free packages unless specifically
> told).
I agree, although not quite so fervently. :-)
cheers
--
Chris Waters xtifr@dsp.net | I have a truly elegant proof of the
or xtifr@debian.org | above, but it is too long to fit into
http://www.dsp.net/xtifr | this .signature file.
Reply to: