On September 16, 2007 09:57:24 pm Brendan O'Dea wrote: > There is a bit of history with the perl-doc package... The perl > community has been at times very critical of the fact that the docs are > split out *at all*. The argument is that the docs are an integral part > of the perl distribution. Are you sure the criticism was about perl-doc being split out, or about perl not warranting that Perl documentation is installed? I guess criticism was that perl should ensure that documentation is available. This is a valid point. If you think it's worth considering, perl could be renamed to something, say perl-bin, and a new "perl" metapackage could created, depending on perl-bin and perl-doc.
I am not convinced that this is worth adding a metapackage though. For example, Apache suggests the documentation and this is fine for me. > >perl-doc is a 7 MB download, so it would be important not to install it on > >default installs. > > If you don't want it, don't install it. I can avoid installing it, but not when doing a default install. Unless you think the package should be installed by default, you're the only one that can avoid that...except perhaps tasksel maintainers by delaying recommends consideration even more :/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
