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

Re: further package removals/potential package removals



This discussion is turning a bit absurd, imo. Just because a package is
lifted out of Core doesn't mean it will vanish from the face of the
earth. You can still install it from Extras if you need it. 

More productive would be to reach a clear definition of the scope and
purpose of Core and Extras, respectively. Then the question of whether a
package belongs in Core or Extras or neither should be fairly trivial.

There seems to be a general consensus that Core should have no more than
one or two pieces of software for any given task. The Desktop sub-
project (Bluecurve) has a clear definition of how these applications are
selected: http://fedora.redhat.com/projects/desktop/defaults.html. This
checklist can quite easily be adopted for the entire Core. 

Other applications/toolkits/etc that are more of niche players, or less
used, can and should live in Extras. Question that are currently
unanswered about Extras include:

- Who will maintain the Extras packages? RH, the community or both?
- Will Extras be distributed in ISO form, and will it be possible to use
the Extras CD during installation?
- Will the packages in Extras be continually updated, like they were in
fedora.us, or will they move more slowly, like the RH maintained
packages in Core?

And finally, the issue of ISO content distribution: can the ISOs be
split up more intelligently, according to type of installation? For
example: for a default headless server or minimal installation, use CD
1. For a default desktop or workstation installation, use CD 1 and 2.
For a non-default graphical installations with no non-English
localization, use CD 1, 2 and 3. For localized/internationalized
installations, use all four CDs.    

/Peter Backlund 



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