On Mon, 2016-02-08 at 12:47 -0500, Stephen Gallagher wrote: > On 02/08/2016 12:45 PM, Mathieu Bridon wrote: > > On Mon, 2016-02-08 at 17:21 +0100, Petr Viktorin wrote: > > > Part of the change is defining the exact subset. The idea is that > > > it > > > should be small, to keep cloud images small for apps that don't > > > use > > > Python themselves. > > > > Wouldn't it be a better goal to not have Python at all on Cloud > > images? > > > > So... no dnf? That seems a little unlikely to yield a good long-term > result. Or maybe dnf shouldn't be written in Python? I mean, if a goal is to minimize the size of the deliverables, at some point you need to cut down on dependencies. And removing a whole language and its ecosystem seems like a pretty good win dependency-wise. Lots of dnf deps are already C libs, so it's not like the heavy-lifting is not available in C. And then for plugins, it is certainly possible to have a C apps and let people write plugins in various languages, among which Python. gedit does this for example, through libpeas. So no, I didn't mean to throw dnf out, I meant to consider what is the minimal features (and dnf strikes me as one), and then radically reduce what those depend on. Note that I'm a Python developer by trade as well as by heart. So I'm certainly not saying Python is terrible and should be eliminated. I just think that managing to remove it from the minimum images would lead better results (and much less confusion) than splitting it into various subpackages. -- Mathieu -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
