On Tue, 2007-01-09 at 18:23 +0100, Chitlesh GOORAH wrote: > On 1/9/07, Kevin Kofler wrote: > > I know. I was referring to Evolution alone drawing in most of GNOME as > > dependencies. Now I personally don't have a problem with having to install > > GNOME libraries (I install whatever (appropriately licensed) libraries programs > > I want to use or even just try out require), but I'm not convinced Evolution is > > a good reason to include them. (In fact, it seems to be the most hated default > > app in Fedora judging from the comments on the mailing lists, some GNOME users > > are looking for an alternative too, some even switched to Kontact or KMail.) > > I'll back the idea for not including evolution in KDE spin. > Hmm having evolution on a kde spin isn't really a kde spin. > Kontact is already among core kde packages why should the heck be a > replacement for that ? at least evolution is being supplied on the > repositories. > As far are firefox and openoffice are concerned, I'm ok with them, but > not evolution. > > example: > Kontact communicates very well with kwallet for password storage. Now > if we include evolution in the kde spin, should we be working to > provide such feature for evolution? > > Chitlesh Having evolution in the KDE spin doesn't mean that it has to be the default group-ware client or even installed by default. As weird as it sounds, I want it in -because- it is so d*mn big. According to the Fedora ML usage stats, Evo holds the #1 spot - making it reasonable to guess that many of them are KDE users. Asking them to download 100s of MB during the installation is a mistake. If/when kmail gets a better groupware/exchange integration, it'll be possible to drop evolution. - Gilboa -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
