[not subscribed to -policy, just keeping original cross-posting] Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt wrote: > I think we may want to start thinking about getting rid of the whole > thing and switching to something which allows us to express more complex > importance measurements for packages. In fact, d-i and its task system > have been a step in that direction, so we maybe should evaluate if we > want to formalize it a bit more and get it into policy to replace > priorities.
Seconded. A use-case based priority system is clearly - IMHO - a better suited system then the "Priority:" paradigm for a distribution as broad reaching as Debian. Whether by extending the tasks system, the Priority paradigm (by perhaps including a [use-case] tag, for instance: "Priority: standard [!embeded]") or another wholly different approach, this seems like a worthwhile idea. One of the possible advantages for a different paradigm would be for "reduced" CDDs, such as Emdebian, whose standard set of packages might divert considerably by having _less_ packages, in which case the current task system would fall short, AFAICT. Cheers -- Leo "costela" Antunes [insert a witty retort here]
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
