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

Re: To Require yelp or not to require yelp



On Sun, Jun 10, 2007 at 10:56:48AM -0400, Christopher Aillon wrote:
> Ville Skyttä wrote:
> >yelp comes with a dependency chain.  In the case of dia, adding a 
> >dependency on yelp (whether directly or indirectly if the dep is in some 
> >gnome lib packages), that right stuff would result in the need to 
> >additionally install yelp, desktop-file-utils, docbook-dtds, 
> >fedora-bookmarks, firefox, gnome-doc-utils, libXt, libbeagle, nspr, nss, 
> >openjade, opensp, scrollkeeper, sgml-common, and xml-common.
> 
> I think your example is a great one.  Do we really want to force an app 
> like dia to pull in all this crap just to use it?  Do we want to 
> basically force everyone that uses a GUI to install firefox and 
> libbeagle?  nspluginwrapper is going to be a requirement of the browser 
> stack soon.  XULrunner is going to come with an additional set of 
> dependencies.

In the case of gnochm, requiring yelp doesn't seem to me to add that
much dependencies, it only adds firefox, but I don't think it is very
common to want gnochm and don't want firefox. yelp allows to have a 
working help, so it seems to me that it is better to require yelp in 
this case.

So, to me, the right thing should be to leave the packager choice. It
doesn't prevent somebody to come up with a document explaining the pro
and cons of adding this Requires, on the contrary it should certainly be
helpful.

--
Pat


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