On Sat, Jan 01, 2000 at 05:21:36PM -0800, Robert Woodcock wrote:
> * One second
> There have been no formal objections, I hope that's enough concensus to
> move forward.
First, I've never seen a `second' or a `formal objection' happen before
a matter was even brought before -policy.
Second, you're meant to be seeking consensus, not just avoiding formal
objections. As far as I'm concerned that means answering questions, not
just saying there have been some.
So, here are my questions.
First, how do the various tasks packages affect this? Do they include
all of standard plus some other stuff, or would, eg, a `router' task
completely obviate the "But I don't want it on my router" complaints?
And if this is the case, what relevance does standard have at all?
Second, are non-experts expected to be able to remove standard packages?
I would assume they're able to, but a few people have complained that
they can't. Is there a dselect misfeature here that will keep reselecting
them or something?
Thirdly, what, exactly, is the point of `Standard'? Personally, I would
have thought making it a fairly complete `This is more than enough to get
you started, and should have most of the things you've probably heard
that Unix has' would be the most reasonable definition [0]. It seems to me
that making it `The minimum stuff for a usable system' would just be
repeating the `required' priority, and `Stuff everyone wants' is likely
to be impossible to actually make. I guess this is basically, why is
bloat more important than functionality?
All I can see here is a closed-minded `I don't want LaTeX or Emacs, and
I don't even want to have to think about it to avoid them'. :-/
I also have to wonder at the utility of moving things *to* optional, which
is already getting fairly cumbersome.
Cheers,
aj
[0] ...and is why I think both gcc and friends, and X11 are or would be
appropriate also. Although I do wonder why `dpkg-perl' is standard...
--
Anthony Towns <aj@humbug.org.au> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/>
I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG encrypted mail preferred.
``The thing is: trying to be too generic is EVIL. It's stupid, it
results in slower code, and it results in more bugs.''
-- Linus Torvalds
Attachment:
pgpsiiwka8LoL.pgp
Description: PGP signature