On Tue, Jan 26, 2010 at 12:49:46PM +0100, Julien Cristau wrote: > I'd object to this. I believe apt-listchanges needs to be in the > default install. If that means moving python-support and python-apt to > standard as well, that sounds like a pretty cheap price to pay. So I > think this bug should be downgraded and reassigned to ftp.d.o.
I concur with this position. To give some more data, I've been looking at the details of what would need additional promotion to priority standard, e.g. by transitivity. python-support depends on: python, dpkg -> both are already at least priority standard, no issue here python-apt depends *additionally* on: python-central, libapt-inst-libc6.9-6-1.1, libapt-pkg-libc6.9-6-4.8, libc6, libgcc1, libstdc++6 -> python-central is already priority standard -> libapt-inst-libc6.9-6-1.1 is provided by apt-utils, which is priority important (no issue then) -> libapt-pkg-libc6.9-6-4.8 is provided by apt (again: no issue) -> the latter 3 are obviously no issue All in all (and unless I've missed something), the choice seems to be relatively self contained. We would "just" need to promote to standard python-support and python-apt. For reference, on amd64 the total installed-size of the 2 is about 4 MB (not considering the *.pyc which will be compiled on the fly by python-support, which I don't know how to evaluate). The only apparent resulting silliness of all this would be have two python runtime helper in standard (-central and -support), but that's already the case today on all real-life installations which require a handful of Python application. We won't be adding much more by pushing that to standard. Cheers. -- Stefano Zacchiroli -o- PhD in Computer Science \ PostDoc @ Univ. Paris 7 z...@{upsilon.cc,pps.jussieu.fr,debian.org} -<>- http://upsilon.cc/zack/ Dietro un grande uomo c'è ..| . |. Et ne m'en veux pas si je te tutoie sempre uno zaino ...........| ..: |.... Je dis tu à tous ceux que j'aime
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature