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

Bug#613580: libgs9: please Recommends: (not Depends:) gs-cjk-resource



-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512

Hi all,

At Tue, 15 Feb 2011 22:59:59 +0100,
Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 15, 2011 at 09:27:59PM +0100, Luca Capello wrote:
> >This seems to me an example where you want Recommends: instead of
> >Depends:
> 
> I fully agree with you.  I am myself on a general crusade for lowering 
> as much possible depends to recommends, so no further arguments needed
> :-)

Hm, I'm not sure why libgs9 needs to depend on gs-cjk-resource.

> I agree that there are issues with the gs-cjk-resource package. It is 
> plural issues: also one of or'ing the relationships for the multiple CJK 
> supportive areas instead of declaring them independently.  I have 
> encouraged the maintainer to move it to co-maintainance at the Debian 
> Printing Team with the intend of helping weed out things like that 
> myself, but have not yet heard back on that proposal.  I have not yet 
> been bothered enough to file bugreports yet (for some weird reason I 
> find it more bothersome to file bugreports than to fully package code 
> and maintain it for years).

I'm sorry for delayed response.
It is OK to do co-maintainance gs-cjk-resource and cmap-adobe-* 
packages at the Debian Printing Team, and count me in the team.

Unfortunately because at this time (will be till summer) I'm in
terrible busy, feel free to modify it.

Thanks,
- -- 
Kenshi Muto
kmuto@debian.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Processed by Mailcrypt 3.5.9 <http://mailcrypt.sourceforge.net/>

iQIcBAEBCgAGBQJNXPOtAAoJEB0hyD3EUuD8r0IP/iVRf17oj1PjEQeEXee/0+3e
egG7TGMLySV7bxntJPSFuCXiQArFuk0CfmzQs/jnlr3ZfO0oDM7AG25onfZA35WA
6QWV3Kg4xS2RmimT2aBlAQ0N+mSHOwhL8ETZ6XfwkhAyjW17HJC/Hy3qNAAn58uQ
Q2GygQTgIFbiuN6HOuWqCiOOv0KLf60H7P5RxG8DNhKFWFSKyJjlci89C9JDUs3x
tMzbkzyGZnkD459cdgD59To4eoFE48+vhdBMBb1yb2V2AIo/3aaQphoTS1NjDH6q
wOWnhbS3mmXPMFVbBMT+NLya43E451/DzdrjjbdujA3CC5pgBPFbTGeW3MGVd9a9
XpHRcZqL8X13lM5NpRd3X/yfbCfEA3A8ThfQ8yEUPTBBDFsFAFzMTquX/T1/uUNp
wt3jM3547hXPnkifIcYm6CT72kxUjGHy3Mf7TMyA8leo2BjwAH3o87D6i/1JlzsW
XRs+Yi2f1os4ly2EQ6gl+RsaA6l8K5wrqpXU+50UrPPR2vi7IC5Q0IGtn7VUh6JZ
7Mc9iH0hJj+L7sbkiUo7BuPkCBD1ghhEnNK/TuPGcN6orV7oJabcFbB7hGG5x18r
w4ujI1FcBEW3Y/3BsSgiiVOCMbHWaiX3aQblwaa2DFxWwu0hsmn6IiRPVXDmciky
d4MMihI5dVk/g5AQEZwc
=KKM0
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----



Reply to: