Branden Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Fri, Dec 14, 2001 at 04:43:37PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote: > > Branden Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > > > On Fri, Dec 14, 2001 at 04:02:51PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote: > > > > I can see justification for making a rule that one shouldn't have a > > > > dependency on a package with invariant manual sections. > > > > > > And what justification would that be? > > > > Um, fill it in yourself. I expect you would agree with such a rule. > > I'm curious to know what YOU think such a justification might be. I'm > asking for your personal opinion. Turnabout is fair play, and I've > indulged your curiosity several times.
I think it's reasonable to judge that people who install a package shouldn't automatically get something with more restrictive conditions attached to it. (I'm not saying I've made such a judgment; I'm of two minds about it.) But this is something like what I mean when I say "I can see a justification".
