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

Re: adding desktop files to misc packages

On 17-Jul-07, 02:05 (CDT), Josselin Mouette <joss@debian.org> wrote: 
> Le lundi 16 juillet 2007 ? 19:08 -0500, Steve Greenland a ?crit :
> > > Some of the users we target don't even know what a window manager is,
> > > and they don't want to know it.
> > 
> > Some of the users we target don't use any desktop environment, running
> > headless servers. So let's remove KDE and GNOME.
> If you have nothing to say apart proving that you don't want to
> understand what people write, what's the point of contributing to a
> mailing list?

You keep saying that because you don't use particular menu entries, and
because you don't understand why anyone would use those menu entries,
they should be removed. When others say that they *do* find those
entries useful, you say that well, we're not the important users, and
our use of those menu entries is irrelevant, and we can work around the

My point, which I tried to make through what I thought was obvious
humorous exageration, was that NOBODY uses all of Debian. There are
huge chunks that I'll never use. To *me* they are useless clutter -
they make Package file downloads larger, they make finding things via
aptitude and apt-cache search more inconvenient, they fill up my disk
with useless translations. But because I agree with the "Debian is the
universal operating system" sentiment, I don't spend time trying to get
that "useless clutter" removed. I accept that many people find that
functionality useful, and get on with it.

If you and the other GNOME maintainers thing your primary users would
be better served by removing the Debian menu entries by default, that's
fine. No one would have batted an eye, so long as it was easy to
re-enable (and yes, I'd consider "edit this file in /etc" sufficiently
easy to qualify). But that's not what you wrote. You wanted to eliminate
big chunks of the Debian menu system[1] that you didn't think were


[1] That may not be what you *intended*. But I'm not the only one who
read it that way.

Steve Greenland
    The irony is that Bill Gates claims to be making a stable operating
    system and Linus Torvalds claims to be trying to take over the
    world.       -- seen on the net

Reply to: