hi emilio, On Friday 21 December 2007 10:37:22 am Emilio Scalise wrote: > Re-installing compiz-fusion I've noticed some things: > - why libcompizconfig, doesn't depend on compiz (or compiz-core or anything > similar). Does make sense to have it without a compiz installation? because the dependency is going in the wrong direction in that case. instead, you should probably argue that compiz (or compiz-core, et c) should depend on libcompizconfig instead. > - It could be great to make some meta-packages, like the one that Shame has > maked (http://shame.tuxfamily.org): a compiz-fusion-full package, > compiz-fusion-gnome, compiz-fusion-kde. sure, i think this is worth discussing. what would the -full package have? maybe something like: package: compiz-fusion-gnome depends: compiz-gnome, compizconfig-backend-gconf, compizconfig-settings-manager, compiz-fusion-plugins-main recommends: compiz-fusion-plugins-extra suggests: compiz-fusion-plugins-unsupported description: compiz fusion for the gnome environment package: compiz-fusion-kde depends: compiz-kde, compizconfig-backend-kconfig, compizconfig-settings-manager, compiz-fusion-plugins-main recommends: compiz-fusion-plugins-extra suggests: compiz-fusion-plugins-unsupported description: compiz fusion for the kde environment package: compiz-fusion-light (or should we just call it gtk?) depends: compiz-gtk, libcompizconfig (since we dn't have a seperate ini backend), compizconfig-settings-manager, compiz-fusion-plugins-main recommends: compiz-fusion-plugins-extra suggests: compiz-fusion-plugins-unsupported description: compiz fusion environment (non-gnome/non-kde) comments? should this change if/when emerald is packaged? fusion-icon? other packages? sean
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.