[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Question regarding policy (11.2)

On Sat, Feb 08, 2003 at 10:57:27AM -0800, Brian Nelson wrote:
> Josip Rodin <joy@gkvk.hr> writes:
> > On Fri, Feb 07, 2003 at 10:22:38PM -0800, Brian Nelson wrote:
> >> Jamin W. Collins wrote:
> >> > Why not move the static libraries to their own package, as someone
> >> > else previously suggested?  This would still allow those that want
> >> > them to have them and those that don't to avoid them.
> >> 
> >> It would bloat the Packages files with a few thousand (basically
> >> worthless) extra packages, as James pointed out.
> >
> > Please re-read my and his post, there was no such determinism in the
> > proposal.
> Err, sorry.  I was under the impression that Jamin supported moving
> *all* static libraries to separate packages (the "worst case" scenario
> as James said).  Maybe I misunderstood him.

I do support such a move.  It increases the options available.  IMHO,
one of the greatest strengths of Linux is that of choice.  Making it
possible for a developer to simply eliminate static library would reduce
the users options.  Thus, I'm against any move that reduces choice.

Would moving the static libraries to separate packages increase the
number of package in Debian, certainly.  Would this be "bloat", I don't
see it as such.  To consider this as bloat is to consider the choice of
editors available in Debian (~100+ according to a quick apt-cache
search) to be bloat.  They are not.  Will every user use them, no.
However, they provide choice.

Jamin W. Collins

Reply to: