Re: Should we allow packages to depend on packages with lower priority values?
On Sat, Dec 20, 2003 at 01:05:08PM +0100, Marc Haber wrote:
> On Thu, 11 Dec 2003 17:25:07 -0700, Paul E Condon
> <pecondon@peakpeak.com> wrote:
> >My understanding of the issue in the original post of this thread is
> >that situations can arrise where Debian policy forbids including some
> >package on a CD in a way that the poster thinks it should be
> >included. I suppose he is an advocate of some package and wants it to
> >have a better position on the supermarket shelf. The answer I'm
> >getting to my questions seems to support the position that priorities
> >is a somewhat arbitrary system for including some packages and
> >excluding others.
>
> No. The original problem is that currently policy requires helper
> packages that are needed by an important package to be important as
> well. This causes these helper packages to be installed by dselect
> even if they're not needed.
>
> In fact, I am an advocate and a co-maintainer of a package that
> already has a very prominent place on the supermarket shelf, and I
> would like to be allowed to place some helpers on a less prominent
> place so that they're not accidentally bought by somebody who does not
> want the main product.
>
I apologize for misstating your position. I got it as nearly backwards
as is possible in an imperfect world. Yet, you are of the position
that policy, as currently stated, treats your collection of packages
in a way that you feel is sub-optimal for both the packages and for
the distribution. On this, my new assertion of your position, I think
we can agree.
I incline towards a view that the ranking of packages that is
currently mandated is more fundementally flawed than I understood from
your original argument. If your argument fails to convince some
people, perhaps it is because your proposal draws attention to a
problem without really solving it.
>From my experience as a user, package categories complicate user
understanding without any apparent benefit. When I first read about
them I was puzzled as to why they exist. My current thinking is that
they somehow simplify the process of placing packages on CDs in the
official release. It is good to have things arranged in such a way
that a new user can get started with just one CD, and it is good
to have some heuristics for finding such an arrangement. But I
wonder; should these heuristics be part of a grand policy?
Again, I'm sorry for having misrepresented your position.
Please, excuse me.
--
Paul E Condon
pecondon@peakpeak.com
Reply to: