Hi Graham,
On 24 January 2021 at 17:53, Graham Inggs wrote: | On Sun, 24 Jan 2021 at 07:10, Dirk Eddelbuettel <e...@debian.org> wrote: | > There is a confusion here. You filed this again rmatrix (aka "Matrix"). | > Matrix does not impose dependencies -- dependent packages do. | | I filed against rmatrix, as this was the package that started this | "transition". Also, I really wanted to involve you, the maintainer of | rmatrix, in the hope you could provide some insight into the nature of | this issue and how serious it is. Yes, of course. It helps to have many parties involved, and I know some of the players on the side of the field. I just wanted to make sure we are both clear about what is happening here: the depended-upon package has _neither control nor knowledge_ of other packages using it and how. It's almost like how filing a bug in our BTS would be wrong for something only Linux Mint did in one of their packages: we do not know what/why/how and do not influence it. Here, AFAICT, then two *TMB packages decided unilaterally to enforce a binary depends on a CRAN package. Which is something very very very very uncommon at CRAN. (They copied a lot of our debian/control grammar and features and there of course >= depends and all that. Unilaterally enforcing such a depend on another R package is AFAIK unparalled.) | > So would you please consider assigning bugs to those packages? | | We can mark other packages as being affected by this bug in the BTS, | and then at least we have a central place for discussion. Would you | mind leaving this bug where it is, at least until we have a better | understanding? Sure. I just don't want Matrix to be "shot" and then blocked or what over uses it has no control over! | > Dirk, who is the messenger being shot at here | | I'm definitely not taking aim at you, and in this case autopkgtest was | the messenger, only it didn't shout loud enough! :) Best, Dirk -- https://dirk.eddelbuettel.com | @eddelbuettel | e...@debian.org
