On Tue, 18 Nov 2014, Charles Plessy wrote:
> Le Mon, Nov 17, 2014 at 03:55:26PM +0100, Santiago Vila a écrit :
> Hi Santiago,
>
> practically speaking, how do you or others use the Optional priority
> to check that a package is not directly or transitively conflicting
> with another package ? Fi
Jonathan Nieder writes:
> Someone asks you to install a package.
> If the package has priority "optional", you can just install it. The
> vast majority of the time, it won't conflict with anything else you have
> installed. Yes, there are exceptions, but for this use case, them being
> pretty
Hi,
Charles Plessy wrote:
> practically speaking, how do you or others use the Optional priority to check
> that a package is not directly or transitively conflicting with another
> package ?
[...]
> Can you give concrete examples where the Extra priority has been instrumental
> for you as a use
Le Mon, Nov 17, 2014 at 03:55:26PM +0100, Santiago Vila a écrit :
>
> The purpose is to allow the user to install as many optional packages
> as he/she wants without having to bother with conflicts.
Hi Santiago,
practically speaking, how do you or others use the Optional priority to check
that a
On Mon, Nov 17, 2014 at 02:29:46PM -0800, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
> Bill Allombert wrote:
> > On Mon, Nov 17, 2014 at 01:59:37PM -0800, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
>
> >>And received
> >> pushback from maintainers that don't understand what the fie
Bill Allombert wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 17, 2014 at 01:59:37PM -0800, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
>>And received
>> pushback from maintainers that don't understand what the field is for,
>> are confused about having to maintain it in two places (debia
On Mon, Nov 17, 2014 at 01:59:37PM -0800, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
> Santiago Vila wrote:
>
> > In this case, however, I fail to see the rationale for actually
> > *dropping* the extra priority, other than "it's not useful for me".
> > Well, it may be useless for you but it's still useful for me.
>
Santiago Vila wrote:
> In this case, however, I fail to see the rationale for actually
> *dropping* the extra priority, other than "it's not useful for me".
> Well, it may be useless for you but it's still useful for me.
I have found the 'extra' priority to be useful personally, too.
Enough so th
On Mon, Nov 17, 2014 at 08:51:02AM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Santiago Vila writes:
>
> An alternative would be to say that all software that doesn't warrant
> standard or higher should be packaged with priority optional *unless* it
> conflicts with something, in which case it should be priorit
Santiago Vila writes:
> In this case, however, I fail to see the rationale for actually
> *dropping* the extra priority, other than "it's not useful for me".
> Well, it may be useless for you but it's still useful for me.
Basically, the rationale is simplification and reducing the cognitive load
Hmm. We drop things when we clearly see they have no purpose, or we
see they are harmful.
For example, some people claim that the rule about priorities and
dependencies is actively harmful, and I think they have a point indeed.
In this case, however, I fail to see the rationale for actually
*drop
On Mon, Nov 17, 2014 at 10:48:15PM +0900, Charles Plessy wrote:
> One of the potential uses of the Extra priority was to allow for
> co-installing all packages down to the Optional priority. However,
> this goal is not seem realistic anymore given the current size of
> the Debian archive, and inde
Control: reopen -1
Control: tag -1 + patch
[CCed everybody who contributed in #758234 and #759260, sorry if you
were not interested in that part of the discussion]
Hello again,
Here is a summary of the discussion in #759260 (cloned from #758234), regarding
the suppression of the Extra priority.
13 matches
Mail list logo
