On Mon, Mar 25, 2002 at 04:49:51AM -0600, Adam Majer wrote: > On Mon, Mar 25, 2002 at 02:01:57AM -0500, Andres Salomon wrote: > > Someone found the need for it and wrote the program. Someone else found > > if worthy of their time to package it. Who are you to judge whether > > it's useful or not? If it turns out to not be useful, sooner or later > > it will be orphaned, get really stale, and eventually get dropped from > > the archive. A collection of "stupid little scripts", as call it, is > > not likely to bloat the archive any more than 20 web browsers based on > > gecko will. > > True, but I'm much more concerned with bloating Packages [sorry that I didn't > say that in the first place]. On low end machines, like m64k or 386/486 > with little ram (<32M) it becomes a horrid process to try to update the > system just because Packages is getting out of control. Then we should change this process and not stop adding packages to Debian as a workaround for the real problem. > And true, it will get O and then dropped out, but that usually takes months to > years. I've seen stuff in O for over a year. And that's no problem if the package isn't buggy and people are still using it. > So in a nutshell, include all the stuff you want but make sure it is > still possible to run Debian effectively on a very low end supported > system like 386 with 12MB. And make that sure by changing the mechanism and software, not by stop adding packages to Debian. Jeroen Dekkers -- Jabber supporter - http://www.jabber.org Jabber ID: jdekkers@jabber.org Debian GNU supporter - http://www.debian.org http://www.gnu.org IRC: jeroen@openprojects
Attachment:
pgpdvUfHdZHGv.pgp
Description: PGP signature