[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Intent To Split: netbase



On Thu, Aug 10, 2000 at 12:47:34AM -0400, Decklin Foster wrote:
> Anthony Towns writes:
> > Well, if you wanted half the people running unstable to just
> > blithely upgrade and have all their firewalling disappear, you could
> > remove the dependencies, I guess.
> The argument for getting rid of all the stuff still lying around in
> netbase is that once the package really is a dummy ``this-only-exists-
> so-that-people-can-upgrade-easily'' package, then it can be removed,
> getting rid of the dependency on what the user doesn't want to
> install. Right now we can't do that, which I what I think Alex's point
> was.

No. The point of splitting netbase isn't in particular to do away with the
package. Just because that's what happened to netstd and xbase doesn't
necessarily mean it'll happen again. I've no plans to make netbase not
exist anymore.

> > Dependencies will start getting rearranged in a month or so, I
> > guess.
> I don't think this is right. Remember that when woody is released,
> people are going to be upgrading from the potato netbase from the
> woody netbase.

That's what Release Notes are for.

Cheers,
aj

-- 
Anthony Towns <aj@humbug.org.au> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/>
I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG signed mail preferred.

  ``We reject: kings, presidents, and voting.
                 We believe in: rough consensus and working code.''
                                      -- Dave Clark

Attachment: pgpmLxamkSrbl.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: