Control: tags -1 +patch On Mon, Jun 19, 2017 at 04:44:20PM -0700, Jonathan Nieder wrote: > Adam Borowski wrote: > > > What about this wording?: > Seconded.
Tagging as +patch then as a formal proposal. > > Obviously, this also requires changing the "extra" priority; either by > > #759260 (complete removal) or at least: > > > > - This contains all packages that conflict with others with > > - required, important, standard or optional priorities, or are only > > - likely to be useful if you already know what they are or have > > - specialized requirements (such as packages containing only > > - detached debugging symbols). > > + This priority is deprecated, but may be used to denote packages > > + that are unlikely to be useful even for most users interested > > + in their general field. > > Does this mean we're losing the requirement that two "optional" packages > are not permitted to conflict with one another? > > In any event, that's probably better to discuss on bug#759260. My wording assumes packages are judged solely on their own merit, if you'd want to keep the "extra" requirement then it'd require an edit. And yeah, #759260 is better for that issue. Meow! -- ⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ ⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ A dumb species has no way to open a tuna can. ⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ A smart species invents a can opener. ⠈⠳⣄⠀⠀⠀⠀ A master species delegates.
