Your message dated Sat, 15 Sep 2012 14:37:27 -0700 with message-id <[email protected]> and subject line Re: Bug#681834: Call for votes on network-manager, gnome has caused the Debian Bug report #681834, regarding Dependency from network-manager to gnome to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith. (NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact [email protected] immediately.) -- 681834: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=681834 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact [email protected] with problems
--- Begin Message ---Package: tech-ctte Severity: minor Dear committe First of all, I'm not a Debian Developer, but just a long time user, and recent Maintainer. I'm writing this since I found no request on Constitution requiring being a DD for submitting an issue to the Committe. As suggested by Ian Jackson on [1], the discussion at hand become circular and repetitive, and this is why I'm submitting this to the committe. I'm not requesting a ruling, but just a clarification. Anyway, a ruling can be made about the issue, or even some developers could be overruled. Whole thing started at [2] in an ITP for a new Window Manager. Thread developed into a more general discussion about packages in the archive that duplicates other packages functionality [3], sometimes focusing in the amount of window managers present in Debian. At a certain moment [4] network-manager entered the discussion as an example of a point where Debian should start removing window managers instead of vetting new ones. A separated thread raised at [5] to discuss the duplicates issue, but network-manager issue continued at [6] and a bit later [7]. Then network-manager centered the discussion at [8] where it was stated that it breaks working software like udev or ifupdown, and it was suggested that the relationship between the gnome package and the network-manager package should not be a Depends chain, but have a Recommends. FYI actual chain is: gnome Depends gnome-core gnome-core Depends network-manager-gnome network-manager-gnome Depends network-manager and Adam Borowski suggested a Recommends instead of a Depends, most probably in the gnome-core -> network-manager-gnome step. Two sides formed. One side critizising network-manager and pressing for a Recommends relationship. Other side defending network-manager and defending a Depends relationship. Main argument of the defender side was that gnome is not a normal package but a metapackage, and thus it should include a set of software using mainly Depends even if there is actually not a real software dependency. >From this, discussion changed names again [9] and get called "Recommends for >metapackages", being a two-fold discussion. On one hand, it was a discussion >for and against metapackages using Recommends as a genera topic. On the other >hand, at the same time it was a discussion about if network-manager should be >or not a Recommends instead of a Depends. Arguments were given both to the >general question and to the particular one. I've tried to be as neutral as possible in the explanation above. My particular point of view on the general is that metapackages are not so special as to avoid the Policy, which states that Recommends should be used for packages that are to be found in all but unusual installations, and metapackages sometimes are used by user with special needs who need to avoid or deinstall certain not required pieces of the platform. My particular point of view about the particular is that since network-manager causes issues to a not negligible fraction of our users, some of which can want to use gnome, the relationship between these two packages should be a Recommends, since the lack of network-manager causes no breakage at all on a gnome system. A complete resume of my arguments (and I hope those of others are included) is on [10]. I can not present a resume on the arguments from the other side since none was provided. I do not want to get the Depends side undefended, I hope you can involve in the discussion some of their representattives. I request from the committe a position about the general issue of Recommends on metapackages (but I wish a ruling about network-manager in particular). Regards Noel Torres er Envite [1] https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2012/07/msg00388.html [2] https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2012/06/msg00821.html [3] https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2012/06/msg00838.html [4] https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2012/06/msg00860.html [5] https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2012/06/msg01057.html [6] https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2012/06/msg00884.html [7] https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2012/07/msg00154.html [8] https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2012/07/msg00155.html [9] https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2012/07/msg00211.html [10] https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2012/07/msg00403.html
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---With Bdale's vote, the outcome is no longer in doubt [A=6, F=0.], the decision of the technical committee is below. Whereas: 1. The gnome-core metapackage is intended to reflect the core of the GNOME desktop environment: the basic tools and subsystems that together constitute GNOME. The gnome metapackage is intended to reflect the broader desktop environment, including extra components and applications. 2. network-manager is the GNOME network control system, and is recommended for most GNOME users. Some Debian GNOME users don't like some of network-manager's behavior and prefer to instead use other tools, either basic ifupdown or other frameworks such as wicd. 3. In squeeze, the gnome metapackage lists network-manager in Recommends but not Depends. In wheezy, currently, network-manager has moved from gnome to gnome-core, and from Recommends to Depends. This represents a substantially increased insistance that users of the GNOME metapackages have network-manager installed; specifically, there is no longer any way to install any but the most minimal GNOME metapackage (gnome-session) without installing network-manager, and users who have gnome or gnome-core installed but have removed or never installed network-manager will have network-manager installed during an upgrade from squeeze. 4. For most applications and components, the only drawback of this would be some additional disk space usage, since the application, despite being installed, wouldn't need to be used. However, network-manager assumes that, if it is installed, it should attempt to manage the system's network configuration. It attempts to avoid overriding local manual configuration, but it isn't able to detect all cases where the user is using some other component or system to manage networking. The user has to take separate, explicit (and somewhat unusual for the average user) action to disable network-manager after it has been installed. 5. The Technical Committee believes that this will cause undesireable behavior for upgrades from squeeze, and (of somewhat lesser importance) will make it more difficult than necessary for GNOME users to swap network management components, something for which there appears to be noticable demand. We therefore believe that network-manager should be moved to Recommends in gnome-core. 6. Please note that this is not a general statement about GNOME components. It is very specific to network-manager because all of the following apply: (i) The package takes action automatically because it is installed, rather than being a component that can either be run or not at the user's choice. (ii) The package has historically been recommended rather than listed as a dependency, so existing Debian users are used to that behavior and will expect it to be preserved during upgrades. (ii) There is both demonstrable, intentional widespread replacement of that package by Debian GNOME users and no significant loss of unrelated GNOME desktop functionality by replacing it with a different component. If any of these points did not apply, the situation would be significantly different. Therefore: 7. The Technical Committee overrules the decision of the gnome-core metapackage maintainers. The dependency from gnome-core to network-manager-gnome should be downgraded to Recommends. 8. The Technical Committee requests that the Release Managers unblock the update to implement this decision, so that this change may be released in wheezy. Don Armstrong -- J.W. Grant: "Bastard!" Rico: "Yes, Sir. In my case, an accident of birth. But you, Sir, you're a self-made man." -- Henry "Rico" Fardan in "The Professionals" http://www.donarmstrong.com http://rzlab.ucr.edu
--- End Message ---
