[arch-general] depends vs. optdepends

[Ralf Mardorf]

On Mon, 29 Dec 2014 18:13:52 -0600, Doug Newgard wrote:
> Arch isn't Debian, every binary isn't given it's own package.

When I read the OPs mail, I wanted to write the same. Now I just need
to ad my +1.

I very seldom want split packages, I prefer that Arch Linux very seldom
does split packages and usually keep it as done by upstream.

We perhaps still remember how many times jackd for Debian was broken,
because Debian split the jackd package. The libjack package alone was
completely useless, but often contributed a broke link. jackd upstream
always was pissed off, when they got tons of requests, just because
Debian package maintainers did a bad job. The bad job was enforced by
Debian's odd policy.

The dependency discussion could become the only reason for me, on day to
drop Linux. Fortunately there are still many applications that don't
force to install unneeded hard dependencies. Many hard dependencies are
completely useless for my needs and at least one hard dependency even
damages my hardware.

Some packages make gvfs a hard dependency. This does damage my external
hard drive. Other packages make it an optional dependencies. Making it
optional IMO is the only sane way to satisfy all users.

When I can install an empty dummy package as replacement for a
dependency, without breaking the main functionality off the app, then
such a dependency should become an optional dependency.

For good reasons I stopped maintaining my Debian and Ubuntu installs
and only maintain my Arch Linux install.

Regards,
Ralf