I don't know if this is in line with policy, but I would split the plugins to one package per plugin, then let each of those packages provide "packagesearch-plugin", and let packagesearch depend on "packagesearch-plugin".
On 8/3/07, Don Armstrong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Fri, 03 Aug 2007, Benjamin Mesing wrote: > > As for 'packagesearch', even if no additional package is installed, > > there is always the full text search available - so the package by > > itself is useful. Thus there is no need to *Depends:* on deborphan > > or apt-file. Also, I could imagine a 'usual' installation (compare > > [2#Recommends]) without those packages installed, so this would hint > > for *Suggests:*. > > That's pretty much the judgement call that has to be made. > > In the default case where someone has installed packagesearch, would > they expect the file search and/or orphaned package plugins to work? > > You get to make a judgement one way or the other; if a significant > population of your users complain that the Recommends: isn't necessary > (or vice versa, that they expected the functionality not present > because you made it a Suggests:) then you know that you should switch > them. > > > Don Armstrong > > -- > The sheer ponderousness of the panel's opinion ... refutes its thesis > far more convincingly than anything I might say. The panel's labored > effort to smother the Second Amendment by sheer body weight has all > the grace of a sumo wrestler trying to kill a rattlesnake by sitting > on it--and is just as likely to succeed. > -- Alex Kozinski in Silveira V Lockyer > > http://www.donarmstrong.com http://rzlab.ucr.edu > > > -- > To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > -- /Carl Fürstenberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>