On 08/08/11 21:59, Vincent Cheng wrote:
> [Adding Dererk, my original sponsor, to cc: for his input]
>
> On Sun, Aug 7, 2011 at 10:50 PM, Vincent Bernat <ber...@luffy.cx> wrote:
>> I am pretty sorry but providing a binary package that does not depend on
>> nvidia blob  does not  make conky  allowed to be  in main.  Policy 2.2.1
>> states that  a package in  main "must not  require a package  outside of
>> main for compilation or execution  (thus, the package must not declare a
>> "Depends", "Recommends",  or "Build-Depends" relationship  on a non-main
>> package)".
>>
>> Therefore, conky should be moved back into contrib.
> I was worried that this would be the case, which was why I originally
> planned on uploading conky as two separate source packages (see my
> earlier reply at [1] for my rationale), but my sponsor convinced me
> that this was unnecessary and not preferable, since it would result in
> two source packages that would be exactly the same. and that it's
> still possible for a source package in main to build-depend on contrib
> components and produce binary packages for main. I guess it is indeed
> possible since the buildds haven't been complaining about
> uninstallable build dependencies...but if it violates Policy, this
> shouldn't be at all possible and needs to be fixed.
>
Although It might appear in the first sight that it's against the
policy, a further look around shows a different scenario.
The main packages themselves , conky-cli and conky-std, do not depend in
any way on contrib ones, opposite to conky-all.

The tricky part for the policy is that the _source_ package is the one
that requires a contrib package to build all their binary ones, and
that's not specified in any part.

Moreover, and not to judge by my misguided daemons, I personally asked
one FTP-Master on this, and his answer was crystal clean, word by word
quoting:
"We are going to call you names, but it's OK. There are a few package on
that situation and It's better this way".


Cheers,

Dererk

-- 
BOFH excuse #28:
CPU radiator broken


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Reply via email to