Re: do not delete gnome-1
On Fri, Sep 30, 2005 at 10:06:52AM +0200, Ondrej Sury wrote:
> On Thu, 2005-09-29 at 23:24 +0200, Johannes Rohr wrote:
> > What about users who *depend* on gnucash for their work? I'm,
> > accidently, one of them. I use gnucash for the accounting in my work
> > and I can't see any alternative to it, no matter how obsolete GNOME 1
> > is.
>
> Please note, that we are not trying to drop gnucash from STABLE Debian
> release.
>
> But it seems to be reasonable for me to exclude gnome1 stuff from etch.
> You can always use D-I-Y method if you want to use gnome1+gnucash. Or
> stay with sarge where gnucash is and will be included.
But why remove those GNOME1 libraries needed by gnucash (etc) when we
have perfectly good packages of those libraries that just need a bit of
maintenance? Just to please your sense of cleanliness?
This is becoming too popular in Debian. An earlier example (that also
affected gnucash and gpredict) was libgal23, which used to be provided
by the gal source package and is now provided by gal0.x (maintained
by Thomas). The maintainer insisted that the gal source package should
provide the latest binary packages, not an old version -- even though
this has no benefit to our users, who deal mostly with binary packages.
(And use "apt-get source" when not.)
Hamish
--
Hamish Moffatt VK3SB <hamish@debian.org> <hamish@cloud.net.au>
Reply to: