On 2011-09-04 13:49, Josselin Mouette wrote: > I think it should now be clear that there aren’t any such issues that > cannot be fixed, with more or less complication. > > Given the benefits for dependency resolvers to be able to guarantee the > dependency tree is actually a tree and not a DAG, isn’t it time to start > mandating this in the policy?
While I also would want Debian to eventually get rid of circular dependencies, I am not sure about (the value of) the benefits. For example, even by default dependency resolvers have to consider Depends-Recommends loops. And if the user has selected to install Suggests by default (yeah, yeah, mostly theoretic-only but still possible), there will be a lot of Depends-Suggests or Recommends-Suggests loops. Also these benefits will be quite delayed, even without counting third-party repositories dependency resolvers will have to wait at least 2 stable releases until they could drop the relevant parts of the code. Therefore I think _for this moment_ mandating in the policy will be too strict. -- Eugene V. Lyubimkin aka JackYF, JID: jackyf.devel(maildog)gmail.com C++/Perl developer, Debian Developer -- 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/20110904124403.GA16029@r500-debian
