> Therefore, the desktop session needs to depend on the portal that has the best integration.
Why does this dependency needs to be specified in the gnome-session package? Wouldn't gnome-core be a better place to specify this? > I am really struggling to see how the benefit of having one less package installed outweighs the harm caused by sandboxed apps being broken. I am not advocating to breaking sandboxed apps. I only wonder if gnome-session is not the right place for this dependency. On Mon, Aug 28, 2023 at 10:33 PM Jeremy Bícha <jeremy.bi...@canonical.com> wrote: > On Mon, Mar 20, 2023 at 6:51 PM Pablo Mazzini <pmazz...@gmail.com> wrote: > > gnome-session can work properly without xdg-desktop-portal-gnome. > > > > As per the policy: > > Depends: This declares an absolute dependency. > > Recommends: This declares a strong, but not absolute, dependency. > > > > Please recommend xdg-desktop-portal-gnome. > > > > The gnome-core meta package already provides this dependency and it may > > be appropriate there. > > I am not convinced by your justification. Flatpak and Snap packages > are expected to work on Debian and require an xdg-desktop-portal > implementation. It is impossible for Flatpak (or Snap) alone to depend > on the correct portal implementation for each desktop. Therefore, the > desktop session needs to depend on the portal that has the best > integration. > > The Debian GNOME team has gotten bugs for years from people who > complain that their system doesn't work after disabling installing > recommended packages. Ironically, the fact that you are asking for > this change proves to me that there are people who intend to remove > recommended packages. > > I am really struggling to see how the benefit of having one less > package installed outweighs the harm caused by sandboxed apps being > broken. > > Thank you, > Jeremy Bícha >
