On Wednesday, 10 December 2008 at 02:42, Matthias Clasen wrote: > On Wed, 2008-12-10 at 01:18 +0000, Bastien Nocera wrote: > > > > > > > So my proposal is to split nautilus into nautilus-core, that will > > > contains the content of the current nautilus package, and nautilus > > > "meta" package that will contains all the dependencies plus dependency > > > on nautilus-core. This solution will install all the deps as today, but > > > leave the option to remove the unnecessary packages afterwards. > > > > > > Only 3 packages will be affected with this split > > > nautilus-devel > > > nautilus-python > > > seahorse-plugins > > > and they should be made to depend on nautilus-core instead of nautilus. > > > > > > I will file a bug with the proposed change to nautilus spec file. > > > > That's not workable. You'd probably rather rejigger the samba packages > > so it's possible to use Samba in any appropriate environment without > > dragging in the server, or the excessively big packages. You should do > > the same for other dependencies. > > > > Removing functionality from nautilus as it is installed by default won't > > fix that problem. > > Fwiw, I don't think it is a big problem to change things so that gvfs > subpackages are pulled in by comps instead of by hard deps from > nautilus, as long as they are all in the default install. I don't > introducing a nautilus metapackage for this purpose is necessary or a > good idea. Why is it not a good idea? We're doing metapackages already and they seem to be working out just fine (see git or R, just to give a couple of examples). Regards, R. -- Fedora http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Rathann RPMFusion http://rpmfusion.org | MPlayer http://mplayerhq.hu "Faith manages." -- Delenn to Lennier in Babylon 5:"Confessions and Lamentations" -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
