On Tue, Jun 03, 2008 at 08:08:07PM +0000, Joey Hess wrote: > Pierre Habouzit wrote: > > Well in your list, there are several intersting examples. lv for > > example, has many replacements. That may not have all the features of > > lv, but that are a decent replacement. Moreover lv isn't _that_ known, > > and if this task doesn't install lv, noone will be hurt. OTOH of course, > > we won't remove xfce4. > > In the specific example of lv, if you remove it from testing, tasksel > will decide not to use the japanese tasks. > > > Usually those non explicit goals depends upon meta-packages like > > kde-core/kde/gnome/xfce4/... And we trust maintainers of those > > meta-packages to provide dependencies on the really hot stuff. > > No, as I've already demonstrated, it's much more complicated than that, > and removal of lots of leaf packages that you may not consider important > at all can affect tasksel and the installer in various ways. Then we need something that our tools can grok so that we know about it. Not everything has this kind of importance in taskel, but if removed packages completely render a task unusable then we need to know about it one way or another. I don't think britney is aware of that e.g., dak isn't either, ... But we just can't block _all_ the things that are part of tasks, the update-* example shows that not everything is central either. If at least britney is aware of it, even if other tools that helps us to write removal hints propose removal hints that fail, we won't break anything, merely loose some time. And then we can integrate whichever thing that britney uses in our other tools as well. I'm not really into britney, but I assume data and fabio read that ;) -- ·O· Pierre Habouzit ··O madcoder@debian.org OOO http://www.madism.org
Attachment:
pgpolX5MoOvcK.pgp
Description: PGP signature