Re: Bug#452393: [PROPOSAL] clarify overstep between "required" and "important" priorities
Charles Plessy <plessy@debian.org> writes:
> §3.7 defines the "base system" as required plus important pacakges.
> With this patch, we have the nice definition that "required" implements
> the "essential" part, and "important" implements the rest of the base.
> I think that it explains better the role of these priorities. By the
> way, in the current Policy, the specifications of what the base system
> provides are scattered across the document. I am tempted to open a bug
> about reorganising this for the version 4.0 of the Policy. Do you think
> it would be a good idea ?
Yes, please. I don't know if we'll get to it, but it sounds like
something we should look at.
--
Russ Allbery (rra@debian.org) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
Reply to: