Core vs. Non-Core definitions

Thomas Ward trekcaptainusa.tw at gmail.com
Mon Aug 6 14:55:35 UTC 2012


Marcel,

C de-Avillez (hggdh) and I were on IRC in #ubuntu-bugs discussing your
response, and we made an observation that the "Priority" is used in Debian
to determine how important a package is to the system, not to the user,
such that if a package is Priority = Required, and you remove it, the
system is likely to misbehave.

By using the tasks approach that Brian suggested, it comes from a different
perspective, specifically that if its included in a task, its probably
considered important enough.

As well, another check is to see whether a package exists in main or not.
A universe or multiverse package is certainly non-core, but a package in
main might be.

I'm still inclined to use Brian's method, though, as a preferred method of
identifying a "core" or "non-core" package.


Thomas



On Mon, Aug 6, 2012 at 6:42 AM, Marcel Admiraal <
marcel.admiraal at connectfree.co.uk> wrote:

> Correct me if I'm wrong, but the "apt-cache show" command displays the
> contents of the Debian package control file, and there doesn't appear to be
> a standard field "Task" defined:
> http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-controlfields.html.
>
> IMHO, I don't consider Empathy a "core" package. In fact, as the
> "Priority" field in the same output indicates, it's optional.
>
> I think, we should use the "Priority" field is as an indicator of a "core"
> application. As per the definition of the "Priority" field values:
> http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-archive.html#s-priorities, any
> application which is "required" or "important" - necessary for the
> functioning of the system, or expected on any system - should probably be
> considered core.
>
> Finally, I think if the word "core" is not defined, the wiki shouldn't use
> it; especially not to define something else.
>
> Marcel.
>
>
> On 03/08/12 15:46, Thomas Ward wrote:
>
> Is there any other discussion we should do on this, or can we use Brian
> Murray's opinion as the methods of determining core vs. non-core packages?
> Or does anyone else have any other opinions on it?
>
> Thomas
>
> On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 6:19 PM, Brian Murray <brian at ubuntu.com> wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 03:52:02PM -0400, Thomas Ward wrote:
>> > I'm dredging this back up again, given a discussion with hggdh in
>> > #ubuntu-bugs.
>> >
>> > This should *really* be defined, core vs. non core for Importance
>> setting,
>> > among other things.
>> >
>> > Core vs. Non-Core can make a bug either Low or Medium (see bold items,
>> and
>> > here: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Bugs/Importance):
>>
>> I'd say packages that are a part of a task should be considered core and
>> most other things non-core.  As an example:
>>
>> apt-cache show empathy | grep ^Task
>> Task: ubuntu-desktop, ubuntu-usb, edubuntu-desktop, edubuntu-usb
>>
>> I would consider empathy as a core application.
>>
>> Does that help?
>>
>> --
>> Brian Murray
>> Ubuntu Bug Master
>>
>> --
>> Ubuntu-bugsquad mailing list
>> Ubuntu-bugsquad at lists.ubuntu.com
>> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugsquad
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Ubuntu-bugsquad mailing list
> Ubuntu-bugsquad at lists.ubuntu.com
> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugsquad
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-bugsquad/attachments/20120806/287e19b0/attachment.html>


More information about the Ubuntu-bugsquad mailing list