OK to reduce priority of update-inetd to optional?

Hi,

Is it OK to reduce update-inetd's priority to optional, to agree with the
archive admin's override? (It should be, as all its rdepends are at most
optional)

It should be Priority: standard only if people use it interactively, and
expect it to be part of a standard installation (but I'm guessing that this
isn't common).

update-inetd_4.32_all.deb: package says priority is important, override says optional.

--
debtags-organised WNPP bugs: http://members.hellug.gr/serzan/wnpp


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST.DeleteThis@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster.DeleteThis@lists.debian.org

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Serafeim Zanikolas schrieb:
> Hi,
>
> Is it OK to reduce update-inetd's priority to optional, to agree with the
> archive admin's override? (It should be, as all its rdepends are at most
> optional)
>
> It should be Priority: standard only if people use it interactively, and
> expect it to be part of a standard installation (but I'm guessing that this
> isn't common).
>
> update-inetd_4.32_all.deb: package says priority is important, override says optional.
>

In my opinion (and I sponsored this upload) it is okay. In my opinion
there is no need that this packages has a bigger importance than
optional, this should fit for this package.

You may report this against ftp.debian.org.

- --
/*
Mit freundlichem Gruß / With kind regards,
Patrick Matthäi
GNU/Linux Debian Developer

E-Mail: pmatthaei.DeleteThis@debian.org
patrick.DeleteThis@linux-dev.org

Comment:
Always if we think we are right,
we were maybe wrong.
*/
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEARECAAYFAkqgKFQACgkQ2XA5inpabMfhvQCeLy0RScUaQ4HxMUAwWIebeHQY
nksAnR54p7JQfSwsBULyhtITNNEkXyUU
=+rYd
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST.DeleteThis@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster.DeleteThis@lists.debian.org