Y Giridhar Appaji Nag <[email protected]> writes: > I agree with this particular example. But I could argue if would > "reasonbly want to install" Kerberos if I "Didn't know what it was". > > I've not seen ftp-master enforce the distinction between optional and > extra, not even in the cases where it is very clearly defined in > policy i.e. extra "contains all packages that conflict with others > with required, important, standard or optional priorities". And in > case of "Packages must not depend on packages with lower priority > values (excluding build-time dependencies).". Look at the Debcheck > pages. > > I am not sure if enforcing "extra" in cases other than conflicts, > Depends: on lower priority and very clear specialised requirements > (elinks-lite, debug symbols etc.) gains us much.
Oh, yes, I agree. I wouldn't go to people in general and ask them to make their packages priority: extra. I was only questioning because you'd said to raise the priority from extra to optional, and this didn't seem like a package where we'd want to make a special effort to move it into optional. -- Russ Allbery ([email protected]) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/> -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected]
