1 |
On 09/11/2010 03:04 PM, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: |
2 |
> Or does the problem only occur if you mix keywords and ignore |
3 |
> dependencies? |
4 |
> |
5 |
|
6 |
I think that if a package doesn't work in a mixed environment, that |
7 |
points to a likely dependency problem. Sooner or later there is a good |
8 |
chance it will bite somebody. |
9 |
|
10 |
Personally, I try to keep package dependencies correct. If a package in |
11 |
unstable needs a library version in unstable, I depend on that version - |
12 |
not on the library itself. Then we won't get burned in six months when |
13 |
I forget all about this or am not around and things start going stable |
14 |
in the wrong order. |
15 |
|
16 |
Sure, if the issue is something really exotic maybe we should just say |
17 |
"don't do that," but usually there is a better fix. |
18 |
|
19 |
Personally I welcome these kinds of bugs, as they're the easiest way to |
20 |
uncover non-obvious dependency issues that might otherwise make their |
21 |
way into stable. Maybe we can't fix them all, but we ought not to just |
22 |
dismiss them out of hand. I certainly wouldn't want to see the |
23 |
bug-wranglers screening for them, for instance. |
24 |
|
25 |
Rich |