Bug#728375: libjetty8-java-doc: Questionable dependencies

[Jan Henke]

Am 09.10.2014 um 10:06 schrieb Mauro Molinari:
> Il 09/10/2014 09:47, Jan Henke ha scritto:
>> Hi, I do think it is reasonable to assume that installing an optional
>> documentation package of one component normally also installs the
>> documentation for other related packages. Especially it does seem to
>> be logical to have default-jdk-doc installed when you install the
>> documentation of jetty. As such I am in favour of keeping the current
>> recommends. For sure the default behaviour does not suit every use
>> case, but I do not think changing the default should be done. I still
>> think the current default is the expected behaviour. 
>
> Just to say that my opinion was based on the fact that I am an
> experienced Java developer. I really don't need the JDK docs just to
> read the Jetty 8 Javadoc.
> I would assume that if one needs to use the Jetty API in its own
> application already knows what a "String" or an "IOException" is, just
> to mention the first two JDK classes that come into my mind.
>
> So, it's just a "logical" vs "practical" approach. Maybe "suggests"
> would keep the logical relationship between packages without
> unexpected practical consequences on the weight of the size on disk
> (almost 8x) and download (almost 12x).
>
> After all, the Jetty 8 Javadoc is self-contained, as it is viewable
> online at: http://download.eclipse.org/jetty/stable-8/apidocs/
> Even if references towards JDK classes didn't work, they won't limit
> the usability of the documentation in a substantial way.
> By the way, I was wondering if inter-javadoc package references work
> if I install all of those 300 MB of packages (do the downloaded HTML
> files contain file:// absolute paths to get to the proper Javadoc
> files in the Debian filesystem structure? I can't test now).
>
> Mauro
Hi,

you say yourself you are an experienced Java developer, thus I strongly
feel your use case and expectations are different from what the default
should provide. You know you do not need the openkdk-doc, so nothing
stops you from preventing the installation of it (with the apt parameter
you mentioned) or removing it again.

I strongly feel the requirements and expectations of experienced people
should *not* set the default. The default should be chosen to
accommodate the need of the novice and average user. When you are an
advanced user you normally also have knowledge to modify the default to
fit your need, something the average or novice user might not have.

I see your point and understand it from my personal use case as well.
But I strongly think our use case should never set the default.
Therefore I vote for keeping the recommends instead of a merely suggests.
-- 
Best Regards,
Jan

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 899 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-java-maintainers/attachments/20141009/cd4fd99d/attachment.sig>