Folks, The package "aptitude" is priority "important" and depends on libboost-iostreams, which is "optional". This is a violation of Policy section 2.5.
The request of Bug #588608 is to raise the priority of libboost-iostreams to "important". Reading Policy, I note that "important" means: `important' Important programs, including those which one would expect to find on any Unix-like system. If the expectation is that an experienced Unix person who found it missing would say "What on earth is going on, where is `foo'?", it must be an `important' package.[1] Other packages without which the system will not run well or be usable must also have priority `important'. This does _not_ include Emacs, the X Window System, TeX or any other large applications. The `important' packages are just a bare minimum of commonly-expected and necessary tools. I wouldn't place any of Boost in that category. In fact, I wouldn't place "aptitude" in that category, either. So while raising Boost will "solve" the issue, it seems to me to be a recipe for runaway priority inflation. Is there any central authority to vet priority changes? Thanks, -Steve
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature