Bug#759491: Bug#758234: Defining pseudo-essential

Charles Plessy writes: > Thanks Russ, I think that this new paragraph is very useful. > If need is I second its addition. Yes, I'm looking for seconds for this. Thank you! > This addition will cause the current section 3.9 (Maintainer Scripts) to > be renumbered 3.10, but I do not expect this

Bug#759491: Bug#758234: Defining pseudo-essential

Le Wed, Aug 27, 2014 at 03:15:28PM -0700, Russ Allbery a écrit : > Jakub Wilk writes: > > * Russ Allbery , 2014-08-27, 09:22: > > >>+ often tricky and inobvious. > > > Is it "inobvious", "unobvious", or "non(-)obvious"? > > Maybe just say "not obvious". > > Yes, that's better. Thanks

Bug#759491: Bug#758234: Defining pseudo-essential

Jakub Wilk writes: > * Russ Allbery , 2014-08-27, 09:22: >>+ often tricky and inobvious. > Is it "inobvious", "unobvious", or "non(-)obvious"? > Maybe just say "not obvious". Yes, that's better. Thanks. -- Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org)

Bug#759491: Bug#758234: Defining pseudo-essential

* Russ Allbery , 2014-08-27, 09:22: + often tricky and inobvious. Is it "inobvious", "unobvious", or "non(-)obvious"? Maybe just say "not obvious". -- Jakub Wilk -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-policy-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact lis

Processed: Re: Bug#758234: Defining pseudo-essential

Processing control commands: > clone 758234 -1 Bug #758234 [debian-policy] debian-policy: allow packages to depend on packages of lower priority Bug 758234 cloned as bug 759491 > retitle -1 Define pseudo-essential Bug #759491 [debian-policy] debian-policy: allow packages to depend on packages of

Bug#758234: Defining pseudo-essential

Control: clone 758234 -1 Control: retitle -1 Define pseudo-essential Ansgar Burchardt writes: > That's related to being (pseudo-)essential and not to priority. Package > of Priority: required do not have to be pseudo-essential, but packages > of lower priority can be pseudo-essential: I hate to