Le Tue, Jul 22, 2008 at 07:11:23PM -0700, Russ Allbery a écrit : > > Policy doesn't really set requirements around priority except for a few > specific cases, and I don't really expect that to change, since that's the > province of ftp-master.
Hi Russ, I am a bit uncomfortable with the fact that there are two different places where specific rules about priorities are set. I do not understand why something that is important enough to be overriden in the Debian FTP archive is not important enough to be specified by the Policy (although I understand the concept of territories and not competing for others's prerogatives). On the other hand, there were already many discussions underlining that the distinction between optional and extra packages is somewhat dysfunctional, so I guess that the most efficient way to solve the problem is a global reform of optional and extra priorities. I nitpick a bit on this because I think that it is really a time sink. For instance, I recently had to object that `optional' was an acceptable priority for a scientific package, althoug this package has a much narrower audience than other optional packages such as openoffice. Having a clear policy that can cope the differences of people's gut feelings would save us some time, I think. Have a nice day, -- Charles Plessy Debian Med packaging team, Tsurumi, Kanagawa, Japan -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
