On Mon, 2014-10-20 at 10:08 -0400, Matthew Miller wrote: > On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 09:54:59AM -0400, Stephen Gallagher wrote: > > 1) You now have to release an update for fedora-release-workstation > > every time a new package gets a per-product configuration (to add the > > new Requires) > > I think that's okay. That kind of change should generally happen as > part of the release development cycle, not arbitrarily. > Sure, but now we're talking policy solutions instead of technical ones. > > 2) Every deployment of Workstation now carries configuration for > > packages that may never be installed (and configuration isn't > > necessarily small, though most of the time it will be). > > Do you have an example that _isn't_ small? > I can't come up with a real-world example of this, just hypotheticals (such as having configuration in the form of a multi-megabyte compiled data file). > > > 3) From a user's perspective, if they see configuration for a service or > > application in their package list, they may assume that package is > > installed and running, leading to confusion. > > That is more worrying, yes.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
-- desktop mailing list desktop@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop
