From: Ian Jackson Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2012 17:56:00 +0000 (+0100) Subject: 681834 some drafts from email X-Git-Url: https://git.donarmstrong.com/?a=commitdiff_plain;h=f610168d71638487496663f59a28667108f9d4b3;p=debian-ctte.git 681834 some drafts from email --- diff --git a/681834_gnome_recommends_networkmanager/ijackson-draft b/681834_gnome_recommends_networkmanager/ijackson-draft new file mode 100644 index 0000000..12d2e55 --- /dev/null +++ b/681834_gnome_recommends_networkmanager/ijackson-draft @@ -0,0 +1,83 @@ +Resent-From: Ian Jackson +Resent-To: debian-bugs-dist@lists.debian.org +Resent-CC: Technical Committee +Resent-Date: Wed, 08 Aug 2012 15:57:01 +0000 +Resent-Message-ID: +Resent-Sender: debian-ctte-request@lists.debian.org +From: Ian Jackson +To: 681834@bugs.debian.org +Subject: Bug#681834: network-manager, gnome, Recommends vs Depends +Date: Wed, 8 Aug 2012 16:54:36 +0100 + +How about this: + + Whereas: + + 1. Our technical objectives are: + + (i) Users who do not do anything special should get + network-manager along with gnome (in this case, along with + gnome-core). These users should continue to have + network-manager installed, across upgrades. + + (ii) Users should be able to conveniently install and upgrade + gnome without network-manager. + + (iii) Users who deliberately removed network-manager in squeeze + (which they will generally have done by deliberately violating + the Recommends from the gnome metapackage) should not have to + do anything special to avoid it coming back in wheezy. + + (iv) Users who do make a decision that they do not want to use + network-manager should not have to read specific + documentation, or temporarily have network-manager installed, + risk being exposed to bugs in network-manager's configuration + arrangements, and so on. + + 2. Our technical objectives do NOT include: + + (i) The `gnome-core' metapackage should in some sense perfectly or + exactly correspond to GNOME upstream's definition of `the GNOME + Core', specifically including every such component as a hard + Depends. + + (ii) The contents of any metapackage should be the correct + expression of the subjective opinion of the metapackage's + maintainer. + + (iii) Users who choose to globally disable Recommends should still + get the desired behaviours as described above in point 1. + + 3. The solution recommended by the gnome-core maintainers is + that users who do not wish to use network-manager should have it + installed but disable it. + + Installing network-manager in these circumstances does + not fully meet any of the above objectives apart from 1(i). + + 5. The alternative solution rejected by the gnome-core maintainers + is downgrade the dependency to Recommends. + + This solution meets all of the objectives from point 1, except + that infelicities in teh package manager may mean that the user + in 1(iii) may need to take action to prevent network-manager + being reinstalled during an upgrade. + + Therefore: + + 6. The Technical Committee overrules the decision of the gnome-core + metapackage maintainer. The dependency from gnome-core to + network-manager-gnome should be downgraded to Recommends. + + 7. The Technical Committee requests that the Release Managers + unblock the update to implement this decision, so that this + change may be released in wheezy. + +Ian. + + +-- +To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-ctte-REQUEST@lists.debian.org +with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org +Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20514.35772.350203.926582@chiark.greenend.org.uk + diff --git a/681834_gnome_recommends_networkmanager/rra-draft b/681834_gnome_recommends_networkmanager/rra-draft new file mode 100644 index 0000000..0ec9a4c --- /dev/null +++ b/681834_gnome_recommends_networkmanager/rra-draft @@ -0,0 +1,98 @@ +Resent-From: Russ Allbery +Resent-To: debian-bugs-dist@lists.debian.org +Resent-CC: Technical Committee +Resent-Date: Wed, 08 Aug 2012 22:39:04 +0000 +Resent-Message-ID: +Resent-Sender: debian-ctte-request@lists.debian.org +From: Russ Allbery +To: 681834@bugs.debian.org +Subject: Bug#681834: network-manager, gnome, Recommends vs Depends +Date: Wed, 08 Aug 2012 15:36:04 -0700 + +Ian Jackson writes: + +> How about this: + +This doesn't feel quite right to me, but I'm not sure how to phrase my +feeling in terms of specific objections. Let me try to instead draft the +sort of statement that I feel like I want to make and see what people +think of it. + + The gnome-core metapackage is intended to reflect the core of the + GNOME desktop environment: the basic tools and subsystems that + together constitute GNOME. The gnome metapackage is intended to + reflect the broader desktop environment, including extra components + and applications. + + network-manager is the GNOME network control system, and is + recommended for most GNOME users. Some Debian GNOME users don't like + some of network-manager's behavior and prefer to instead use other + tools, either basic ifupdown or other frameworks such as wicd. + + In squeeze, the gnome metapackage lists network-manager in Recommends + but not Depends. In wheezy, currently, network-manager has moved from + gnome to gnome-core, and from Recommends to Depends. This represents + a substantially increased insistance that users of the GNOME + metapackages have network-manager installed. This change is, so far + as the Technical Committee understands, driven primarily by user + confusion and bug reports, but does not reflect a deeper or tighter + integration of network-manager into GNOME than was the case in + squeeze. + + If matters are left as they currently stand, users who have the gnome + metapackages installed but do not have network-manager installed will, + in the process of upgrading from squeeze to wheezy (either due to an + explicit decision to remove it or an implicit decision to not install + it by disabling automatic installation of Recommends), end up + installing network-manager on systems where it is currently not + installed. It will also no longer be possible for users to install + GNOME metapackages in wheezy without installing network-manager. + + For most applications and components, the only drawback of this would + be some additional disk space usage, since the application, despite + being installed, wouldn't need to be used. However, network-manager + assumes that, if it is installed, it should attempt to manage the + system's network configuration. It attempts to avoid overriding local + manual configuration, but it isn't able to detect all cases where the + user is using some other component or system to manage networking. + The user has to take separate, explicit (and somewhat unusual for the + average user) action to disable network-manager after it has been + installed. + + The Technical Committee believes that this will cause undesireable + behavior for upgrades from squeeze, and (of somewhat lesser + importance) will make it more difficult than necessary for GNOME users + to swap network management components, something for which there + appears to be noticable demand. We therefore believe that + network-manager should be either moved to Recommends in gnome-core, or + moved from the gnome-core metapackage to the gnome metapackage (which + is defined as including additional, optional components). + + Please note that this is not a general statement about GNOME + components. It is very specific to network-manager because all of the + following apply: + + 1. The package takes action automatically because it is installed, + rather than being a component that can either be run or not at the + user's choice. + + 2. The package has historically been recommended rather than listed as + a dependency, so existing Debian users are used to that behavior. + + 3. There is both demonstrable, intentional widespread replacement of + that package by Debian GNOME users and no significant loss of + unrelated GNOME desktop functionality by replacing it with a + different component. + + If any of these points did not apply, the situation would be + significantly different. + +-- +Russ Allbery (rra@debian.org) + + +-- +To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-ctte-REQUEST@lists.debian.org +with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org +Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87k3x9royz.fsf@windlord.stanford.edu +