On Fri, 2010-11-05 at 10:11 +0100, Jonas Smedegaard wrote: > On Fri, Nov 05, 2010 at 09:41:19AM +0100, Roman Haefeli wrote: > >On Fri, 2010-11-05 at 00:10 +0100, IOhannes m zmoelnig wrote: > >> On 2010-11-04 22:51, Felipe Sateler wrote: > >> > >> > Usage in a helpfile does not really warrant a Depends relation. > >> > Recommends or Suggests are better. > >> > >> i couldn't have said this better. > >> > >> (esp. in this very case, where the help-patch is fully functional > >> even without pd-pddp installed; having pd-pddp only allows to have a > >> clickable link in the help-patch for more information, instead of a > >> (harmless) error on the pd-console) > > > >I'm not sure if I understand correctly: The proposed solution is to > >have a missing object in help-file, unless the user does a manual > >install of pd-pddp? So in future Debian releases, when people open > >help-files they're welcomed with error messages? > > Almost: > > In the future when advanced users - who override recommendations - open > help-files they're welcomed with error messages. > > Recommends are for things useful for most users but not all, i.e. things > that does not cause the core functionality of the package to fail. > > In the past apt-get was broken and did not respect recommends and > instead treating them like suggests. This lead to the myth that > recommends should be avoided. > > Please aggressively use recommends, for the benfit of unusual uses of > packages.
Thanks for making this clear for me. "Recommends: pd-pddp" sounds good to me. Roman _______________________________________________ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list firstname.lastname@example.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers