"Eugene V. Lyubimkin" <jac...@debian.org> writes: > On 2012-07-10 15:32, Josselin Mouette wrote: >> Le mardi 10 juillet 2012 à 17:38 +0900, Miles Bader a écrit : >> > What's wrong with Recommends: in that case? It seems to perfectly >> > match the "makes life easier for <common but not universal use-case >> > XXX>" scenario you describe. >> >> Recommends is wrong for metapackages because it gets upgrades very >> wrong. This is why it is used very marginally. > > Standards should not depend on implementation details. I see zero > reasons why metapackages are (or should be) specific here. Whatever $it > that gets upgrades wrong should be fixed instead.
But the purpose of the meta-package is to pull stuff in. Depends does that, Recommends does not, therefore Recommends is not appropriate for the task. For the cases where one wants to have most of the stuff installed that the meta-package would pull in, but not all, solutions already exist. And like Josselin said in the same mail, there is a large overlap between those who want to push some of the stuff in Depends to Recommends, and those who can just make their own local meta-package within 5 minutes and be done with it. -- |8] -- 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/87obnnzoly.fsf@algernon.balabit
