gdm/xdm/wdm conflict
Right now xdm, wdm, and gdm all conflict. I understand that the
Conflicts lines are necessary with the current state of the world, and
I don't have any expectation that the underlying problem will be fixed
for potato.
However, all three packages are in Optional, and this is a serious
problem. It means that a naive user cannot try to install all
Optional packages, which the installation documentations tells them
they can do. Morevover, when they try, they confusing messagses from
dselect, at a time when it is least conducive to user happiness.
Fixing this bug is trivial: two of the offending packages need to be
moved into Extra. (If xdm is one of the packages moved into Extra,
then task-x-window-system will need tweaking too.)
I submitted a bug report against all three packages to this affect
yesterday, and marked it Important because it has such a potentially
horrible effect on naive users who tell dselect to accept all Optional
packages.
Again, I understand the underlying problem is hard to solve, and I
certainly don't expect such work to happen in potato at this late
date. But I do think that solving the policy violation is trivial, by
merely reassigning any two of the packages to Extra instead of
Optional.
The bug report has been incorrectly downgraded to wishlist for all
three packages. Policy violations are always bugs, unless they are
very hard to fix. This one is trivial to fix (merely assigning two of
the packages to Extra will solve it), so assigning them to Wishlist is
clearly wrong.
If they must be downgraded, it would be to Normal, not to Wishlist.
But even then, I strongly protest and ask for some examination of the
actual issue here: a user who selects all optional packages should not
be presented with a confusing array of dselect errors and warnings,
but should instead have a system which happily installs all the
relevant packages.
Reply to: