Bug#758234: debian-policy: allow packages to depend on packages of lower priority
Andreas Henriksson <andreas@fatal.se> writes:
> Even if ftp-masters where really keen on actively managing the overrides
> file I wonder what purpose this would serve?
> As already mentioned previously in this bug backlog it would just be a
> waste of ftp-master time.
> Either way, I'm adding ftpmaster to CC now.
Thanks! Let's just ask directly.
ftp-master folks, we're discussing eliminating the requirement that
packages only depend on other packages with the same or higher priority
(so important packages would be able to depend on optional packages), and
deprecating the extra priority entirely (so everything at extra priority
would end up being optional over time). This also means eliminating the
requirement that no two packages at optional priority conflict with each
other.
Some parts of this have more consensus than others, so I'm not sure we'll
do all of these things. But one question that keeps coming up is whether
y'all care or have strong opinions about any of this.
Do you care about any of these topics as ftp-master and the current
effective owners of archive priorities? Or would you be fine with just
going with whatever decision the Policy discussion produces?
(The underlying mental model behind these changes is the belief that
priorities have become basically meaningless to the typical user who is
installing packages -- they use other mechanisms to find the package they
want to install -- and really only serve a purpose at the priorities
higher than optional for initial installs, deciding what to put on CD
images, and for hinting purposes for tools like debootstrap. None of the
requirements we're considering removing are particularly relevant to those
purposes, so feel like largely wasted effort by ftp-master and package
maintainers.)
--
Russ Allbery (rra@debian.org) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
Reply to: