On Mon, Jun 06, 2016 at 08:48:12PM +0200, Julian Andres Klode wrote: > On Mon, Jun 06, 2016 at 07:29:44PM +0200, Adam Borowski wrote: > > When trying to remove an Important:yes package, the message claims it's > > essential:
> Well, it sort of is. Not in the "Essential: yes" sense, but in a broader > sense. My point is, the word "essential" has a specific meaning, so reusing it for something only somewhat similar is bound to cause confusion -- at the least, make the user think he's dealing with an actually Essential package. There's a difference between needing the highest level of confirmation known to apt and something dpkg doesn't even require confirmation for. > we have not decided on an official name for that field, the current one is > just a very old one. In that case, perhaps using it in packages is premature? > So, no idea what to do here. Hmm, if you're still debating what Important should do (and even its very name), making big changes here might indeed be a waste of effort because of the risk of having to do them again. Thus, what about changing just the message for now? An interface for overriding it can wait until you're happy with the specs. Meow! -- An imaginary friend squared is a real enemy.
