Re: Priority Levels
On Sat, Jun 12, 1999 at 10:09:37PM -0700, David Starner wrote:
> One, that developers take "all the software that you might
> reasonably want to install if you didn't know what it was
> or don't have specialised requirements" more strictly.
Please. As a user, I would be very grateful to see many packages moved to
extra, and most new packages placed there.
In order for the optional category to be serve its stated purpose, the set
of <= optional packages should be easily browseable and consume a reasonable
amount of disk space. Another heuristic might be, "would most experienced
Un*x users recognize this package?". Installs are painful when I have to
scroll through hundreds of unfamiliar packages just to see the ones I "might
With 2792 optional packages to 573 extra (in my available files), the
distinction is nearly worthless.
Don't forget that Linux became only possible because 20 years of OS
research was carefully studied, analyzed, discussed and thrown away.
- kernel hacker Ingo Molnar