On Friday, 14 June, 2013 03:26 PM, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
On 14/06/13 09:22, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
ISTR recommending a package not in the archive was a bug, but I can't find a
reference. So if you would like to keep this that's fine with me as it won't
prevent migration of your package. Though perhaps you may want to downgrade it
to a suggest. I leave that decision to you.
Found the reference now, see
http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-archive.html#s-main
"must not require or recommend a package outside of main".
You could downgrade it to a suggests though.
Hello Emilio,
thank you very much for adding that information. I am certainly not
trying to keep that Recommends line around forever even though the
package is gone. My intention is to fully understand what you and
Jeremy are trying to fix and to make sure it is fixed in the right way.
In particular I was tripped by the suggested change not being to simply
drop the recommends line but making changes to the build where the added
patch 03_disable_evo_database.patch claims in the subject that the
evolution backend no longer works. All I can say is that the last time
I tried it (admittedly on Ubuntu precise) it was working just fine
IIRC. This might no longer be the case with the latest Debian and
Ubuntu releases which I only run in virtual containers on an as-needed
basis.
As far as the quoted policy is concerned, I believe that mostly concerns
the DFSG. A package in main should not recommend a package in non-free,
for example. Besides, python-evolution IS in main, just simply not in
unstable. So, it is my understanding that the gbirthday package in its
current form does not violate the policy.
Thank you again for the discussion.
Regards
Rolf
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
