Transitional/dummy packages unhelpfully shown by default

Bug #526330 reported by Nicolò Chieffo on 2010-02-23
This bug affects 3 people
Affects Status Importance Assigned to Milestone
software-center (Ubuntu)

Bug Description

software-center 1.1.12, Ubuntu 10.04

It could be useful to hide transitional packages, so that unexperienced users don't install them thinking it's an additional software

The Software Updater equivalent is bug 1166230.

Nicolò Chieffo (yelo3) wrote :
Changed in software-center (Ubuntu):
status: New → Confirmed
assignee: nobody → Matthew Paul Thomas (mpt)
Matthew Paul Thomas (mpt) wrote :

That seems like a good idea. Two questions:
1. How can we tell, programmatically, which packages are transitional?
2. Who would ever want to see transitional packages, and when?

Matthew Paul Thomas (mpt) wrote :

An answer to my first question:

<mpt> If anyone knows how a computer program can tell the difference between a transitional Ubuntu package and a non-transitional one, please let us know in bug 526330
<seb128> mpt, it can't really I think
<seb128> mpt, seems we would need to add extra informations in the system somewhat
<mpt> seb128, how about "Depends on one other package and contains no files itself"?
<seb128> mpt, those have files, ie copyright, etc
<chrisccoulson> "no files itself" is normally incorrect
<mvo> mpt: not trivially, there is a idea to add a "transitional" section that would solve it nicely
<chrisccoulson> yeah ;)
<seb128> so it would be "no file out of the standard ones"
<seb128> but they are not the only one in this case
<mvo> and we don't know the filelist until we downloaded it
<seb128> like we have common packages stripped from translations matching as well
<mpt> mvo, is anyone/anything tracking the progress of the "transitional" section idea?
<Laney> there's a lintian tag empty-binary-package
<Laney> you could look how that works
<Laney> I think it looks at the description to decide to exclude transitional packages, so inverting that logic could fly
<mvo> mpt: not currently :( its something that ideally would be part of the debian policy and is useful for other things (like automatic dependency tracking). the best way forward is probably to start a discussion on debian-devel

If anyone gets this organized, please reassign back to me for design work. In the meantime, an answer to my second question would still be useful: Who would ever want to see transitional packages, and when?

Changed in software-center (Ubuntu):
assignee: Matthew Paul Thomas (mpt) → nobody
importance: Undecided → Wishlist
milestone: none → later
summary: - hide transitional packages
+ Transitional packages unhelpfully shown by default
Changed in software-center (Ubuntu):
importance: Wishlist → Low
summary: - Transitional packages unhelpfully shown by default
+ Transitional/dummy packages unhelpfully shown by default
Scott Ritchie (scottritchie) wrote :

The only time I can think of caring about transitional packages is when they suddenly become nontransitional due to naming conflicts with a PPA.

Changed in software-center (Ubuntu):
milestone: later → none
Kiwinote (kiwinote) on 2011-09-27
tags: added: db
Scott Ritchie (scottritchie) wrote :

As an update, we have now standardized on putting transitional packages into the "oldlibs" section. Would it be wise to just hide everything there by default? (do we do this already?)

description: updated
To post a comment you must log in.
This report contains Public information  Edit
Everyone can see this information.

Other bug subscribers