On Wed, 2010-04-21 at 22:04 +0200, fons@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: > On Wed, Apr 21, 2010 at 10:59:17PM +0800, Ng Oon-Ee wrote: > > > I appreciate the desire for a minimal system. What I don't understand is > > the vilifying of packages just because they're part of a standard Gnome > > install. > > That's not the point. According to the definition on > the gstreamer website > > "GStreamer is a library for constructing graphs of media-handling > components. The applications it supports range from simple Ogg/Vorbis > playback, audio/video streaming to complex audio (mixing) and video > (non-linear editing) processing." > > Fine. Potentially very interesting and useful. > > But if it depends on things that have *nothing at all* > to do with the claimed application domain - security > subsystems (keyrings) and configuration programs for > a specific desktop (gconf) that, at least in my world, > is a sign of *crappy design*. Which seems to invade > almost everything Gnome. One is almost tempted to believe > that introducing irrelevant dependencies is the essence > of the game. > > Ciao, > Would you prefer the developer reimplement security-authorization and a configuration parser, then? Its not even as if gconf and its editor aren't separated into different packages.
