Bug#60253: More clearly
On Sat, Jun 17, 2000 at 08:10:56AM +0900, Atsuhito Kohda wrote:
> > If there is Suggest: tetex-nonfree, why not suggest tetex-extra, too?
>
> Do you really investigate the contents of tetex-nonfree and tetex-extra?
>
> I think that basically tetex-extra and tetex-nonfree are supplement
> of tetex-base so it is reasonable
They are both supplements of tetex-base, yes, so they should both be
suggested. For that matter, tetex-bin should be suggested, too.
One could argue that task-tex provides this functionality, i.e. telling
users which packages to install to get a full TeX, but the users might not
know about task packages, and still, little more consistency can't hurt.
> > tetex-bin suggests tetex-extra
>
> because this is a weak form of "tetex-bin depends tetex-base"!
I don't understand what you mean.
> I think, on the contrary to your request, it might be more reasonable
> that one transfer "Suggest: tetex-nonfree" of tetex-base to tetex-bin
> too but as the contents of tetex-nonfree are rather trifle so it might
> be enought to set weak dependency as
>
> tetex-bin =(depends)=> tetex-base =(suggests)=> tetex-nonfree
>
> This is rather delicate decision of the maintainer, IMHO.
I was looking at it from the standpoint of a newbie user. They will think
that tetex-base will get them a `tex', as the name may indicate, but it
won't. If there was a suggestion (or even a recommendation) to other
packages that do provide the full thing, it would be more clear what to
install.
> BTW, I think the following is a bad design of BTS.
>
> > No. 60253@bugs.debian.org reaches the BTS and the maintainer, whereas
> > 60253-submitter@bugs.debian.org reaches the BTS and the submitter.
I disagree. When there is a discussion about a bug report, the submitter
doesn't need to know all about it, whereas the maintainer does. The
Reply-To: header of the messages BTS forwards to the maintainer from
submit@bugs.debian.org is set to user's real address plus the bug address.
One just has to respect that Reply-To:.
--
Digital Electronic Being Intended for Assassination and Nullification
Reply to: