Re: Recommends for metapackages
Jeremy Bicha <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> I don't claim to be a networking expert, but I believe half the
> conversation here is based on wrong or outdated information.
My (personal) complaint about NM is that it doesn't correct correctly
work with NFS mounts, I believe because it doesn't run at the right
time during bootup.
That's perhaps illustrative of more general practical and conceptual
issues with NM: it doesn't seem to be tested with much in the way of
non-standard setups, and in general seems to assume too many low-level
and central system tasks that arguably aren't appropriate for software
associated with a specific desktop (even if Gnome is installed on a
system to make some users happy, other users of the same system may
use some other desktop).
> GNOME considers NM to be part of GNOME Core, therefore gnome-core
> depends on it.
Debian need not slavishly follow how upstream thinks about things.
Plenty of upstreams have downright bizarre opinions about various
issues (often related to the not playing nice with others), but
nevertheless still make useful software. In such cases I think one of
the proper tasks of a distribution is to act as a buffer between
upstream and the users, installing the software in a way that works
well in the actual distribution, for actual users (as opposed to the
imaginary distribution and users upstream may be targeting).
Obviously this can be a lot of work, which is why it's generally a
good idea to defer to upstream's views when they are sane -- but that
isn't always the case...
Friendship, n. A ship big enough to carry two in fair weather, but only one