On Tue, Nov 01, 2011 at 01:42:47PM +0000, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Yes, that much is obvious. So the answer is that there is no harm in
> actually removing network-manager.
There is harm in diverging from upstream. We're a software
distribution, by default we integrate existing software and we try to do
so staying as close to upstream as possible. We do diverge from upstream
when we've good reasons to, but we don't do that "just because".
Given you have a way to install a GNOME environment without n-m, I fail
to see your point. At best, it seems to me you should be arguing with
the GNOME maintainers to have another meta package ("gnome-minimal"?)
and respect their choice if they don't want to.
FWIW, I don't think that escalating this to -devel in search of
pitchfork equipped network-manager haters is a good strategy either.
/me (maybe a bit too grumpy)
Cheers.
--
Stefano Zacchiroli zack@{upsilon.cc,pps.jussieu.fr,debian.org} . o .
Maître de conférences ...... http://upsilon.cc/zack ...... . . o
Debian Project Leader ....... @zack on identi.ca ....... o o o
« the first rule of tautology club is the first rule of tautology club »
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature