On Fri, 2009-12-11 at 16:02 +0100, Xavier wrote: > On Fri, Dec 11, 2009 at 1:54 PM, Hussam Al-Tayeb <ht990332@xxxxxxxxx> > wrote: > > On Fri, 2009-12-11 at 22:45 +1000, Allan McRae wrote: > >> Hussam Al-Tayeb wrote: > >> > The current case for many packages that use optdepends is as > >> follows. > >> <snip> > >> > >> I think some of this would be solved if/when we implement this: > >> http://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/User:Allan/Pacman_OptDepends > > > > Thanks Allan. this is a good solution especially "optdepends can be > > removed with -Rs" and "optdepends are not orphans unless a flag is > > specified". > > Thank you :) > > > > Your proposal is not stupid, it would indeed make the optdepends > problems obsolete by getting rid of most of the optdepends, and > provide cleaner packages and dependencies. > Nagy had the same thought in a private discussion we had a while ago. > > Of course then there is also an increased complexity of packaging with > a lot of splitting and a much bigger number of packages. > And with that example of pacman and rankmirrors, rankmirrors is a 190 > lines python script. I don't think it deserved a package on its own. > Anyway for that specific example, some people were not happy about the > python dependency and rewrote rankmirrors in bash. pacman package may have been a bad example but you get the general idea.
