On Thu, 18 Sep 2008 10:46:11 +0200 Laurent Bigonville <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, 18 Sep 2008 01:32:39 +0200 > Ricardo Mones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Wed, 17 Sep 2008 18:27:03 +0200 > > Laurent Bigonville <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > sylpheed should maybe suggests claws-mail-tools instead of > > > recommends it. apt now install recommends by default and this make > > > sylpheed pulls claws-mail too. I think this is a little bit too > > > much. > > > > Yep, it's probably too much. Anyway I'm considering downgrading the > > claws-mail-tools versioned Depends on claws-mail to a Recomends: > > claws-mail > > | sylpheed instead. This should solve this issue and seems more > > correct: > > scripts in tools package doesn't really need claws-mail or sylpheed > > to run but the data handled by them or even others (think conversion > > filters). What do you think about this alternative? > > I don't know if dependency loop in recommends are a good thing or not. > Maybe completely drop dependency/recommends of claws-mail | sylpheed in > claws-mail-tools (and add a Enhances ?) The dependency loop should not bring any problem here: the | allows fulfilling the install request without adding another package for both claws-mail and sylpheed. The enhances it's a good idea, though :-) The final dependency set will be: sylpheed -> Suggests: claws-mail-tools claws-mail -> Suggests: claws-mail-tools claws-mail-tools -> Enhances: claws-mail, sylpheed Reading again policy seems that Suggests is more appropriate for this than the Recommends, as you originally pointed out. thanks, -- Ricardo Mones http://people.debian.org/~mones «Courage is your greatest present need.»
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
