Not an active member of the Perl team, but there's a Policy point here that seemed worth clarifying.
Sean Whitton <spwhit...@spwhitton.name> writes: > On Sun 28 Aug 2022 at 09:28PM -05, Daniel Lewart wrote: >> Debian FTP Master(s) and Niko, >> >> Currently, perl-modules-5.34 and perl-modules-5.36 are libs/standard. >> >> However, Debian Policy 2.5 Priorities: >> https://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-archive.html#priorities >> states: >> "In particular, this means that C-like libraries will almost >> never have a priority above optional, since they do not provide >> functionality directly to users." >> >> Since perl-modules-5.xx are not standalone packages and are in >> Section:libs, I consider this Policy to apply to them. Well, speaking as a Policy Editor, the same argument does not apply to Perl modules because Perl modules do not have the separate -dev package split that is the reason for this statement in Policy. Perl modules do provide functionality directly to users. That said, maybe this change is still correct, just not for that reason? >> Please change perl-modules-5.34 and perl-modules-5.36 from: >> * Priority: standard >> to: >> * Priority: optional >> >> perl 5.34.0 is Priority:standard" and Depends on perl-modules-5.34. >> perl 5.36.0 is Priority:standard" and Depends on perl-modules-5.36. >> Therefore, perl-modules-5.xx will still be pulled into Standard systems. I think the stronger argument here is basically that the perl-modules package is an internal implementation detail of the perl package, and therefore only the perl package should have the higher standard priority. I'm not sure it makes much difference in practice, and I'm curious what problem Daniel ran into that motivated filing a bug report, but I think that logic might make sense? But I'm also not sure we should make changes here just for the sake of making changes, so I'm curious about the motivation and what problem this change would fix. -- Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) <https://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
