On 21 December 2010 00:17, Andreas Barth <[email protected]> wrote: > I doubt that you get enough buy-in from the maintainers to do that.
I never said it would be easy, but having said that, I like your suggestion better, it's more elegant. Of course it would still need changes from the maintainers, but it's much easier to have that accepted indeed. > That's not possible. There is a minimal set of packages > build-depending on themselfs - but we should try to keep that set as > minimal as possible. I don't think so, packages that have self-build-dependency are very few, and policy could easily add an exception to the rule, eg. compilers like gnat, sbcl, fpc, ghc6, etc. each requires itself to build. These are not the rule to what I am suggesting. My point is eg. multi-node cycles in the dependency tree, like lvm2, network-manager, libsoup, avahi, subversion build-depending on kde, gettext(!) on git and many more like that. I'm pretty firm in my belief that these cycles should *never* be allowed in the archive in the first place. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected] Archive: http://lists.debian.org/[email protected]
