Re: package.el: soft dependencies?

[Yuri D'Elia <wavexx@thregr.org>]

On 14/07/15 23:52, Yuri D'Elia wrote:
>> But for optional dependencies you'd want to know what you get when
>> installing more stuff, also within the package manager.  So there should
>> also be a one line summary of what the dependency adds (this is how pacman
>> works; I don't remember how verbose apt is).
> 
> apt has no detail as of why a package is suggested, and it works well
> enough for me. Presenting the list briefly, as done for the requirements
> would do.

To be clear: not that I won't like a summary line, but I don't think
it's required at all to still be a great addition in usability.