On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 03:33:25PM -0500, Jonathan Nieder wrote: > Raphael Hertzog wrote: > > > The reason > > we request peer review of Pre-Depends is that they have a cost and should > > not be abused. > > Okay. That's not what policy §3.5 says; it does not say Pre-Depends should > or must be peer-reviewed or that one should examine all aspects when adding > them but simply that there should be > > (1) a discussion on debian-devel, and > (2) a consensus that adding this particular Pre-Depends is a good idea.
I think the policy is correct. I would favor keeping the current wording. As you can see in the debian-devel archive, a lot of developer misunderstand what Pre-Depends actually do and adding spurious Pre-Depends can be quite disruptive to the upgrade path. Hence the need to refer to debian-devel for review. On the other hand, making the requirement more stringent would be too bureaucratic (sometimes Pre-Depends are necessary and should be used). So I would favor closing this bug, if nobody object. Cheers, -- Bill. <ballo...@debian.org> Imagine a large red swirl here. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-policy-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20140228160515.GA4107@yellowpig