James Blanford <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > That's to be expected. My concerns are _user_ concerns not _developer_ > concerns. But, really, laptop-detect??? My three year old knows the > difference between a laptop and a desktop.
In that case, perhaps you could package your three-year-old for Debian and then we could offer that as an alternative to laptop-detect? I don't really understand the substance of this objection. A person being able to tell the difference between a laptop and a desktop and having an automated computer program do so in order to minimize user prompting (which, I'll point out, is a frequently expressed *user* concern, not a developer concern) are a bit different. > I notice you have no response to the Debian policy I quoted. Well, I do. Depends is also used for package configuration. If the package can't configure itself without those packages, Depends is appropriate. Now, given that aptitude pulls in Recommends by default, I can see the argument for reducing the dependency to Recommends *if* there's a reasonable alternative configuration that doesn't require any of these utilities. But, particularly since we're talking about *user* concerns rather than developer concerns, I have to say that *users* do not expect to hand-write xorg.conf files. *Users* generally cannot cope with operating systems that expect them to do that. Improved auto-configuration is something the X team has worked on specifically to address user concerns. -- Russ Allbery ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/> -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
