❦ 8 octobre 2016 13:05 CEST, Evgeni Golov <evg...@debian.org> : >> > > But all-in-all, what matters is the dependency, as there were no changes >> > > since 2013 (4.1+Debian10), and Jessie has 4.1+Debian13. >> > >> > Just to be clear, are you suggesting that the version part should be >> > dropped? >> >> It's a political question. My nitpicker side favours precise dependencies >> (because we can), but my realistic side admits lsb-base >= 4.1+Debian13 will >> be available for all packages which will see changes following the lintian >> warning. >> >> If we can, and we can, we should have precise dependencies instead of >> 'available in stable'; it helps downstreams as well. > > I kind of agree. Just adding the >= 3.0-6 dep all over Debian is not really > needed. > For downstreams, well, can't lintian have profiles for them and thus emit > slightly > different suggestions, if the downstreams actually still have such an > old lsb-base?
Ubuntu Precise also has a recent-enough version of lsb-base. Putting a
version is extra work because it may need to be updated. We put 3.0-6,
then we have to update to 3.2-14 for status_proc. Then we discover there
may be people with backports so we update to 3.2-14~. This makes a lot
of people in Debian work for people that do not exist (those with
distributions older than oldoldstable that install packages from
unstable or those from old derived distributions that install packages
From unstable).
--
Write clearly - don't sacrifice clarity for "efficiency".
- The Elements of Programming Style (Kernighan & Plauger)
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
