On Sat, 13. Oct 06:08 Bart Martens <ba...@debian.org> wrote: Hi Bart,
> My opinion is based on how I understand "Depends" and "Recommends" in > debian-policy. The package should work, providing at least some basic > funcionality, without the software in "Recommends". > I think this bug highlights why we can and should learn from (package) history and why every maintainer often sits between two stools. :-) For example there is Rogério Brito who argued three years ago one should not make the dustin font a hard dependency because this would save disk space if someone creates a special disk image, e.g. a Live-CD. http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=539654 Three years later you're requesting the opposite. Now i also think you can revert every decission from the past but i agree with Rogério here. Then one of the features of wbar is, it's a light launch bar. It has only a few essential dependencies. Of course thus wbar can't compare to feature rich applications like AWN-dock, Cairo-dock or Docky. It's niche is old hardware with less RAM, and it's great in combination with window manager setups. Other distributions are using its strength: TinyCore Linux uses wbar as part of his default desktop and it also looks good on the live cd from linuxgamers.net. > And about Julien's reason for downgrading to "important" : > http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?msg=7;bug=599083 > Editing the ~/.wbar file to specify an existing font should not be needed. As long as you install wbar with recommends that's exactly what's happening now. > initial ~/.wbar, or /etc/wbar.conf if such file exists, should use an existing > font included with the package or installed on the system via "Depends", not > "Recommends". > > So, in my opinion, this bug should be fixed in wheezy. The initial wbar package shipped icons and a font but alas they were non-free. I could recently convince upstream to remove them completely from their svn repo and now everyone has the opportunity to choose fonts and icons which they prefer. And i think that's exactly one of Debian's strengths to use recommends to create a sane default but also let experienced users decide to remove them completely and choose whatever icons and fonts they like. But you have to choose, not just to remove! Yes configuration can sometimes be troublesome, but i'm sure editing a conf file and changing paths to icons and fonts is not the hardest task. Last but not least, i even think policy is on my side: "Recommends This declares a strong, but not absolute, dependency. The Recommends field should list packages that would be found together with this one in all but unusual installations." Honestly how do you call a launch bar without icons? > But, if you want to downgrade the bug to "important", then I'm not going to > the > TC for this. :-) That makes me very happy because i would have been considered such a scenario a very bad start into official debian packaging. :-) Regards, Markus
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
