People, please lets keep it civil. On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 09:49, Jonas Smedegaard <d...@jones.dk> wrote: >> You say that "It is beneficial to Debian to keep package dependencies >> as simple as possible." Generally I agree, but I'd also say it is even >> more benefical to try as hard as possible not to break things - even >> possibly unsupported corner cases. > > So you like "simplest possible", but favor complexity by tracking > unusual corner cases - including extremes of unsupported cases.
<snip> > > If you cannot live with others applying such tiny changes to your pet > > packages, you shouldn't have them team-maintained! > > You claim it is a tiny change, I do not. All decisions have costs and benefits. In this particular case, the cost is having to specify a minimum required python version. The benefit is that people with unsupported old cruft in their system will continue to have a working system, and it may even enable them to remove said old cruft from the system. Jonas, why do you claim it is not a tiny change? In this case it is a 1 line patch that requires no maintainance. -- Saludos, Felipe Sateler -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
