On Monday 25 August 2008 20:36:34 Zac Medico wrote: > > Zac Medico <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Looking at the dependencies of kde-base/kde, it seems like it would > >> be eligible to exhibit the "virtual" property. > > I'm inclined toward "virtual" since it's more brief and I think it > might strike a chord with more people because of their familiarity > with the "virtual" category and old-style PROVIDE virtuals. We'll > have to see what others have to say.
kde-base/kde isn't like a new- or old-style virtual. If you want it to be used for metapackages and things too, calling it "virtual" would be confusing.
