Reading through the bug report and skipping most of the flame war, I'd like to discuss another idea:
It seems that every package required by an other package must have have at least the priority of another package. Just an provocational question: Is this really neccessary? For what is this information used? I assume (its a while back I read the docs) that it for example used to determine on which CD a package will sit? In this case, one could introduce a scheme of "Priority inheritance", like a virtual priority a package automatically get assigned to when its reverse dependency requires this. This way the virtual dependencies can be used for decision where to place a package, and still assign priorities which reflects the usefulness/importance of the dependee. This approach will also make sure that there is no priority inflation, as it is right now. One year from now, without knowing this bugreport, anyone will ask "WTF is libboost important?" "virtual-priority: important (reverse dependency of aptitude)" would that make clearer. (Yes, the virtual dependency should be calculated at runtime and not in debian/contol) Just my 2 cents. tobi -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-rc-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
