Johannes Rohr <jorohr <at> gmail.com> writes: > > Dear GNOME maintainers, > > while I do use adblock plus with Iceweasel, it seems a bit arbitrary to > me that the gnome meta package declares a dependency on it. Adblock plus > is not part of the GNOME desktop. In addition, it pulls in iceweasel > which also isn't. What is the rationale behind this decision? > > Until now, I had assumed, that the policy regarding Debian's GNOME > desktop was to closely reflect the official GNOME desktop as defined by > upstream. I see that the gnome metapackage is not totally strict on > that, but still, most packages which are not part of the official GNOME > release are suggests or recommends, not depends. Why this exception, for > a package which isn't even based on the GNOME platform? > > BTW: I do keep on using adblock plus myself, however, there are some who > dislike it since the developer has begun to generate revenues through > paid-for exclusion from the filter lists for some types of ads. > Therefore, as I understand, some people are now using different adblockers. > > So I would suggest to at least lower the dependency to suggests, if not > to drop it from the dependencies altogether. > > Thanks, > > Johannes > >
I agree completely with Johannes. I use Debian/Linux because it is not Windows and I want to control what is installed on my computer. My opinion is that anything that is not strictly required in order to make a package work should not be a dependency, only a recommendation. I don't want ads to be blocked, I don't want extra code bulking up my tools, and I don't want to have to even think about having to disable some functionality that I never wanted installed in the first place. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected] Archive: http://lists.debian.org/[email protected]
