Bill Allombert <[email protected]> writes: > Where does policy define the concept of 'non-default alternative' for > dependencies ?
Good point. I think this should be more explicit, not just for this but because it's a common topic elsewhere (such as with the default MTA) and is something packagers should keep in mind when writing alternative dependencies. I've just filed a new bug against Policy for this discussion, since it's somewhat independent. -- Russ Allbery ([email protected]) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/> -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected] Archive: http://lists.debian.org/[email protected]
