The reasoning for having the ECMAScript libraries as Recommends is: * The HTML report is not required for the primary function of the package. This package is useful without ever using the HTML report feature. Hence, it is not sufficiently necessary to warrant “Depends”.
* The HTML report is an important feature that is advertised in the documentation, and should be enabled by default. Hence, it should be installed by default unless the sysadmin decides to remove it; it should be no lower than “Recommends”. There's another way through this, though: I could see a change to the HTML report feature such that it is enabled by default, but works *without* ECMAScript. This would require changing the expectations of the HTML output, and preferably working with upstream to de-couple the HTML from the need for ECMAScript libraries. If the ECMAScript libraries merely enhanced the HTML report, instead of being required for that feature, I could then condone those libraries being demoted to “Suggests” dependencies for this package. -- \ “A computer once beat me at chess, but it was no match for me | `\ at kick boxing.” —Emo Philips | _o__) | Ben Finney <[email protected]>
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
