Hi! On Thu, 2017-08-31 at 11:35:13 -0400, Theodore Ts'o wrote: > On Thu, Aug 31, 2017 at 02:03:58PM +0200, Guillem Jover wrote: > > Package: e2fsprogs > > Version: 1.43.6-1 > > > > The recently split translations ended up being added as a Suggests in > > e2fsprogs, which means they will not be installed by default anymore. > > This should probably be a Recommends, which would allow people to > > remove them, but would be pulled in by default. > > It hasn't been clear to me whether there is some kind of de factor > standard about what the priority of translations should be. They are > not strictly speaking necessary for the proper operation of e2fsprogs, > and people have started complaining that the translation files is > getting very heavyweight.
Right, they are not necessary for the operation of the program by itself, but might instead be necessary by the (non-English-speaking) user to be able to operate the program. :) > Some kind of guideline about how these packages should be named (e.g., > -l10n versus -locales) and what priority they would be might be a good > thing to publish somewhere, if it doesn't already exist? I'm not > entirely certain it needs to be in Debian Policy as a mandatory thing, > but I spent a bunch of time trying to figure out what was considered > best practice, and it wasn't obvious to me. Perhaps my Google-Fu failed me. > :-) I think the common trend now is to use -l10n, which seems like the correct thing to do, as even though it's a bit of a technical term it's also pretty unambiguous. I even filed a report against lintian to that effect some time ago: <https://bugs.debian.org/698944> And regarding the strength of the dependency. I still think Recommends is the right bar, even though I (being a non-native English speaker) do remove all l10n packages from my primary system as I tend to use just LANG=C.UTF-8. :) Thanks, Guillem
