On Thu, Oct 05, 2000 at 05:27:21AM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote: > I know a lot of people are annoyed by tetex and emacs being standard > priority, and I personally find it odd that X isn't "standard" these > days, especially since it's "more of a piece of infrastructure than an > application".
Because Ian Jackson, who originally authored that language, likes TeX and Emacs, but hates X. Our present definition of "standard" has everything to do with his personal preferences. That said, I don't particularly care if X goes in standard or optional, though in attempting to keep with the definition of standard, I made a policy proposal that makes it a bug for any package of standard or higher priority to be linked against Xlib (or otherwise depend on X). So if there's some Grand Plan to move X into standard, I'd like to know about it so I can batch it together with the policy changes that are going to be necessary in the wake of XFree86 4. -- G. Branden Robinson | There's nothing an agnostic can't do Debian GNU/Linux | if he doesn't know whether he believes [EMAIL PROTECTED] | in it or not. http://www.debian.org/~branden/ | -- Graham Chapman
pgpwiVziOmzSq.pgp
Description: PGP signature
