Comments regarding pd-arraysize_0.1-1_amd64.changes

[Roman Haefeli]

On Fri, 2010-11-05 at 10:11 +0100, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 05, 2010 at 09:41:19AM +0100, Roman Haefeli wrote:
> >On Fri, 2010-11-05 at 00:10 +0100, IOhannes m zmoelnig wrote:
> >> On 2010-11-04 22:51, Felipe Sateler wrote:
> >>
> >> > Usage in a helpfile does not really warrant a Depends relation. 
> >> > Recommends or Suggests are better.
> >>
> >> i couldn't have said this better.
> >>
> >> (esp. in this very case, where the help-patch is fully functional 
> >> even without pd-pddp installed; having pd-pddp only allows to have a 
> >> clickable link in the help-patch for more information, instead of a 
> >> (harmless) error on the pd-console)
> >
> >I'm not sure if I understand correctly: The proposed solution is to 
> >have a missing object in help-file, unless the user does a manual 
> >install of pd-pddp? So in future Debian releases, when people open 
> >help-files they're welcomed with error messages?
> 
> Almost:
> 
> In the future when advanced users - who override recommendations - open 
> help-files they're welcomed with error messages.
> 
> Recommends are for things useful for most users but not all, i.e. things 
> that does not cause the core functionality of the package to fail.
> 
> In the past apt-get was broken and did not respect recommends and 
> instead treating them like suggests.  This lead to the myth that 
> recommends should be avoided.
> 
> Please aggressively use recommends, for the benfit of unusual uses of 
> packages.

Thanks for making this clear for me. "Recommends: pd-pddp" sounds good
to me.

Roman