Re: X support, and other alternate configurations
Gordon Sadler <gbsadler1@ispchannel.com> wrote:
>On Mon, Jan 15, 2001 at 01:01:48AM +0000, Colin Watson wrote:
>> Is the intent really to forbid multiple front ends to programs like
>> gnutalk from being split into separate packages?
>
>I'm no expert, but check the vim package collection by Wichert
>Akkerman.
Well, the footnote to that paragraph in policy says: "It will enable
packages like vim-tty to become legal if they are promoted to standard
priority" (now vim-tiny, I suppose). From that I'm assuming that the vim
packages aren't actually policy-compliant at the moment.
>From that and other packages with similar multiple choices, I
>would say if they are small, lump them together if possible. If they
>conflict (only one at a time makes sense), then separate them but build
>all/most from same source if at all possible.
I'll see if I can live with having stuff depend on emacs. :)
--
Colin Watson [cjw44@flatline.org.uk]
Reply to: