[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: base dependency warning


In article <19991220140659.I10483@kitenet.net>,
  at Mon, 20 Dec 1999 14:06:59 -0800,
    on Re: base dependency warning,
 Joey Hess <joeyh@debian.org> writes:

> Since Adam tells us this is no longer true and the boot-floppies team
> decides what goes in the base system, and since we seem to have a consensus
> that the base section is then unnecessary, policy needs to be updated. 
> Since other parts of policy refer to "the base system", we still need some
> definition of what that system is, or quite a few paragraphs (see end of
> this email) would need to be changed. Here is one way we could reword policy:
> | 2.3.6. The base system 
>   ----------------------
> |
> |   The base system is a minimum subset of the Debian GNU/Linux system that is
>     installed before everything else on a new system.  Thus, only very few 
> |   packages are allowed to go into the base system to keep the
> |   required disk usage very small.
>     Most of these packages should have the priority value `required' or at
>     least `important', and many of them will be tagged `essential' (see
>     below).
>     You must not place any packages into the `base' section before this has
>     been discussed on the `debian-devel' mailing list and a consensus about     
>     doing that has been reached.

In article <19991220160409.V10483@kitenet.net>,
  at Mon, 20 Dec 1999 16:04:09 -0800,
    on Re: base dependency warning,
 Joey Hess <joeyh@debian.org> writes:

> Joseph Carter wrote:
> > I don't think the last 3 lines need to remain in policy.  Any issues with
> > removing them?  Otherwise this sounds good to me.
> Removing them changes who is responsible for that. That's worth a seperate
> proposal, I think it might be too controversial to tack onto this one, which
> is just documenting existing practice.
> I don't see anything wrong with the boot-floppies folks asking on -devel
> before adding stuff to base.

In the urgent time such like now, I prefer "to announce on -devel also,
but to discuss on -boot". I don't see anything wrong with the maintainer
of the package which will go into "base system" and related people are
invited to join the -boot list and discuss about boot-floppies.

 ("base system" is merely a part of boot-floppies, isn't it ?)

I think the development of boot-floppies will and should go on -boot list.

  Taketoshi Sano: <sano@debian.org>,<sano@debian.or.jp>,<kgh12351@nifty.ne.jp>

Reply to: