severity 398752 wishlist clone 398752 -1 reassign -1 debian-policy retitle -1 (Re-)Add "editor" to virtual package list block 398752 by -1 thankyou
(adding CC:d-policy, last time to CC:d-devel) Hi Eddy, > Well, some people provided some (good) counter examples, but they seem > unreplied. > Look at [1], [2] and at this: yes, I know. Dale got no response in the end, while Ian argued that there is no true dependency (pine can work fine without an editor, although somewhat limited) and that users should be able to remove what(ever) they want to. As I said, if it were for me only, I'd simply add the Provides. I had hoped that this discussion could be resumed and brought to a true conclusion, but it looks as if d-devel isn't very interested in the matter. So, dear policy list: Is there a good reason not to re-add "editor" to the list? This would just acknowledge the present situation, as most editor-like packages provide this virtual package anyway, disregarding its removal from the list. > Also, the virtual package editor could be added as essential somehow allowing > the users to have the editor of choice on the system. I don't think an editor is essential to the functionality of a system. Regards, Jan
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
