Re: Reverse weak dependencies in RPMFusion packages
On 09/04/2016 12:40 AM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> On 09/03/2016 01:50 PM, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski wrote:
>> Dear RPMFusion contributors!
>>
>> In light of https://fedorahosted.org/council/ticket/61 and
>> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Workstation/Third_party_software_proposal
>> should we start adding Supplements: or Enhances: weak dependencies
>> to, say, ffmpeg and other packages?
>
> IMHO, no. This decision is severe mistake.
Why? This use case is exactly what the reverse versions are for. The Fedora
repository should not know about RPM Fusion,
Fedora must not know about any 3rd
party repo.
RPM Fusion should know about
Fedora. So why should Fedora carry the weak dependencies on RPM Fusion
packages?
Fedora must not carry any deps of any kind to any 3rd party repo.
... RPM Fusion doesn't have any reason to use weak deps instead of hard
deps[1], but featuritis.
Ralf
[1] That said, I do not see any reason for Fedora to carry weak deps at
all, at least for now, because Fedora's tooling (Noteworthy: dnf) still
doesn't seem to be able handle them properly.