Re: just a little Opie status...
- To: email@example.com
- Subject: Re: just a little Opie status...
- From: "Ivan E. Moore II" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Date: Fri, 31 Jan 2003 22:47:33 -0700
- Message-id: <20030201054733.GA32486@earthlink.net>
- In-reply-to: <20030201050900.GG23446@alcor.net>
- References: <20030131213618.GB24259@earthlink.net> <20030131215708.GF31754@rikers.org> <20030131222824.GA28217@earthlink.net> <20030201000424.GA716@rikers.org> <20030201011810.GC23446@alcor.net> <20030201012737.GA32034@earthlink.net> <20030201015502.GD23446@alcor.net> <20030201030900.GA21580@earthlink.net> <20030201050900.GG23446@alcor.net>
On Sat, Feb 01, 2003 at 12:09:00AM -0500, Matt Zimmerman wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 31, 2003 at 08:09:00PM -0700, Ivan E. Moore II wrote:
> > I guess my question would be what do we currently "need". Is there a
> > current need for both x11 & qt/e versions of opie on all archs?
> > We can provide both x11 & qt/e versions of opie but that of course doubles
> > the amount of packages. I know we all just love hearing that evil word
> > from the ftp guys "bloat". :)
> My view is that one of the most compelling reasons for basing this system on
> Debian is to take advantage of the wealth of software that is easily
> available and integrated. In the case of GUI applications, these are almost
> exclusively X11 applications.
well...what we can do is this. 1st round of opie packages will be Qt/E
based. Once they are functional (from a Debian packaging/functionality
perspective) I'll put out a X11 based opie set.
Ivan E. Moore II
GPG Fingerprint=F2FC 69FD 0DA0 4FB8 225E 27B6 7645 8141 90BC E0DD