Folks, The package "aptitude" is priority "important" and depends on libboost-iostreams, which is "optional". This is a violation of Policy section 2.5.
The request of Bug #588608 is to raise the priority of
libboost-iostreams to "important". Reading Policy, I note that
"important" means:
`important'
Important programs, including those which one would expect to
find on any Unix-like system. If the expectation is that an
experienced Unix person who found it missing would say "What on
earth is going on, where is `foo'?", it must be an `important'
package.[1] Other packages without which the system will not run
well or be usable must also have priority `important'. This does
_not_ include Emacs, the X Window System, TeX or any other large
applications. The `important' packages are just a bare minimum
of commonly-expected and necessary tools.
I wouldn't place any of Boost in that category. In fact, I wouldn't
place "aptitude" in that category, either.
So while raising Boost will "solve" the issue, it seems to me to be
a recipe for runaway priority inflation.
Is there any central authority to vet priority changes?
Thanks,
-Steve
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
