Re: [OT] Re: Banning installation of particular packages

[Chris Bannister <cbannister%slingshot.co.nz@localhost>]

On Tue, May 08, 2012 at 05:59:57PM +0200, Jean-Yves Migeon wrote:
> Le 08/05/12 14:59, Chris Bannister a écrit :
> >>nowadays. I mean, installing apache ends up suggesting a web browser
> >>and pulls in X.org and half gnome. Nice suggestion.
> >
> >Really?
> 
> Check yourself:
> 
> http://packages.debian.org/squeeze/apache2.2-common

Umm, you said ... "pulls in X.org and half gnome" 

and I said ...

> >Not my experience. By the way, suggestions are just ... suggestions.

And it's true, It didn't pull in *any* of Gnome. Of course, to run a web
browser you do need xorg.

> >File bugs if it pulls in "Recommends" which aren't necessary.
                                         ^^^^^
> See? You prove the point. Recommends are not necessary. Dependencies
> are. IMHO three levels of choice makes it messy, two ought to be
> enough.

Some packages just aren't useable without other packages also being
installed. 

> That puts pressure on maintainers through reports on "why foobar is
> not part of recommends, because my personal experience makes it so."

No pressure, surely? Once the recommends are "sorted", doesn't that make
for a more useable system? 

> And then you get a bug report "please move xyz from recommends to
> suggestions, because it's not a requirement per-see."

Fine.

> Consuming maintainer's time for opt-in/opt-out SAT solving is not a
> time well spent. Assuming there is a solution.

It doesn't *consume* the maintainer's time any more than any other bug.

Also, the maintainer *does* have the final word. (Well OK, its really
the technical committee, but it would be unusual in this case, to
involve them. And they are only involved if no consensus can be achieved
after a lengthy discussion on the debian-devel mailing list.)

-- 
"Religion is excellent stuff for keeping common people quiet."
   -- Napoleon Bonaparte