Le 21/05/2014 11:54, Оlе Ѕtrеісhеr a écrit : > Hi, Hi, > I just came around the science policy and found the following sentence: > > | The Priority field should be set to "extra" if this is permitted by > | the Debian Policy, or set to "optional" otherwise. > > However, the Debian Policy states: > > | optional - (In a sense everything that isn't required is optional, but > | that's not what is meant here.) This is all the software that you > | might reasonably want to install if you didn't know what it was and > | don't have specialized requirements. This is a much larger system and > | includes the X Window System, a full TeX distribution, and many > | applications. Note that optional packages should not conflict with > | each other. > | > | extra - This contains all packages that conflict with others with > | required, important, standard or optional priorities, or are only > | likely to be useful if you already know what they are or have > | specialized requirements (such as packages containing only detached > | debugging symbols). > > I would guess, the two priorities are mixed up in the Science policy, > right? I think the rationale is that Science packages "are only likely to be useful if you already know what they are". However they are not at all like the stated example (detached debugging symbols, so I do believe that the meaning of the Policy is that most of our packages should be of Priority "optional" and our Science Policy is sort of wrong. That's what I have thought for a couple of years now, and I'm glad you bring the matter. Kind regards, Thibaut. -- * Dr Thibaut Paumard | LESIA/CNRS - Table équatoriale (bât. 5) * * Tel: +33 1 45 07 78 60 | Observatoire de Paris - Section de Meudon * * Fax: +33 1 45 07 79 17 | 5, Place Jules Janssen * * thibaut.paumard@obspm.fr | 92195 MEUDON CEDEX (France) *
Attachment:
smime.p7s
Description: Signature cryptographique S/MIME