On Sat, 26 Jun 2010 17:45:15 +0200, "Bernhard R. Link" <brl...@debian.org> wrote: >* Marc Haber <mh+debian-de...@zugschlus.de> [100626 14:07]: >> On Fri, 25 Jun 2010 14:27:31 -0700, Steve Langasek <vor...@debian.org> >> >The footnote to Policy 3.5, where this is written out? >> >> Ah, so this is the same as the no-circular-dependency rule, dumping >> extra error proneness and extra thoughtweight on all developers > >Please, try to be a bit more fair. Having people not need to specify >dependencies is really not the solution that "dumps extra error >proneness and extra thoughtweight" on the developers.
Imagine an embedded system that doesn't have bash for some reason and a local admin wanting to install a package containing /bin/bash scripts. This can be done given the current situation, but leads to subsequent failure. >I'm personally all in favor for making the "hard to deinstall" >and "not needed in dependencies" different things Agreed. >If you read the second paragraph it also gives a reason that has nothing >at all to do with making it easier for software [1]: If there are no >dependencies, essential stuff can just move between packages or have >packages renamed. How often do we do that? Greetings Marc -- -------------------------------------- !! No courtesy copies, please !! ----- Marc Haber | " Questions are the | Mailadresse im Header Mannheim, Germany | Beginning of Wisdom " | http://www.zugschlus.de/ Nordisch by Nature | Lt. Worf, TNG "Rightful Heir" | Fon: *49 621 72739834 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/e1osbzh-0002so...@swivel.zugschlus.de
