On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 06:50, Miles Bader <mi...@gnu.org> wrote: > I've noticed many cases where packages recommend a bunch of stuff that, > while it might be very nice for some users, really isn't of general > interest.
So, because package maintainers don't read and understand the policy which defines clearly for what 'Recommends' should be used (hint: §7.2 "in all but unusual installations" != "nice for some users") we should give maintainers even more options they don't understand? The idea of using it for l10n-packages hints already that conditions based on packages are not enough, soon it will be 'tasks' or based on local environment. I can already hear someone asking for Package: libc6 Recommends: libc6-686 {arch::supports:cmov} which soon evolves to a complete language in which you really need all the funky stuff like & and | and ! together with hard/soft constraints… So, in the end what we would need is a machine parseable reason why a package is recommend/suggested by a maintainer so the machine can evaluate if it should suggest this to the user. And in that end, the user still has to decide what should be installed and what should not, so maybe we should focus on making the massive amount of information we already have easily available before we add even more… Best regards David Kalnischkies -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/BANLkTi=XXf=twazys6pmxctgxnfg+_d...@mail.gmail.com