does mc really require perl*?

[Miloslav Trmač]

On Fri, Sep 20, 2013 at 5:12 PM, Vít Ondruch <vondruch at redhat.com> wrote:
> Dne 11.9.2013 21:54, Bill Nottingham napsal(a):
>
>> The problem with soft dependencies has always been the semantics and the
>> workflow, not the implementation.
>
>
> So do we have the implementation? I am afraid not, since this "problem" is
> always used as an excuse why not implement it. But discussing workflow
> without implementation makes no sense IMO.

We can probably implement any semantics once we know what it should
be.  OTOH, we shouldn't start using an implementation of specific
semantics if the semantics is highly risky to be useless; sure, doing
so would allow us to "declare success" that we have soft dependencies,
but it would be a hollow victory.

(IMHO, disk space is cheap enough that just using hard Requires: is
rarely wrong enough to worry about it.)
    Mirek