Re: Debian GNOME Policy, Mark II

[Colin Walters <walters@debian.org>]

On Sun, 2003-01-19 at 15:15, Joe Drew wrote:
> On Sun, 2003-01-19 at 12:00, Colin Walters wrote:
> > I'm thinking about making a "gnome-core" package which would serve that
> > role, and then having our "gnome" package be very featureful; to the
> > point of possibly say recommending abiword, evolution, galeon, and
> > rhythmbox for example (and gnome-vfs-extras2 of course).
> 
> Which would be the selection for the Desktop task - gnome-core or gnome?

I think that in these days of large hard drives, it makes sense to have
the default be "gnome".

> Oh, and you'll want to choose a different name, since gnome-core already
> exists (and is a gnome 1 package, apparently). gnome-base?

Ah, point. Hmm.  I don't think the gnome-core package is useful anymore;
it conflicts with the GNOME 2 stuff.  We should have it removed from the
archive.  Christian, do you agree? 

Then maybe we can go ahead and use the gnome-core name.

> I agree that saying apt-get install gnome should give you a much more
> featureful desktop than just what GNOME says is equal to GNOME, in the
> same way the Red Hat desktop is more than just "GNOME."

Cool.