On Dec 1, 2007 9:03 PM, Jesse Keating <jkeating@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > This is the classic argument. > > "We need subpackages!" > > "Why?" > > "Because it will make Fedora better as a base!" > > "Why?" > > "Because it will!" > > "How?" > > "Because it will! If you don't get that, then your dumb!" For those "dumb" people, the more granular the packages are, the easier it is to pick and choose what you want. You have more "choice". If the packages are lumps of things, it's very hard to pull out what your 1% use case needs and doesn't need. For those "smart" people, too much choice is generally a Very Bad Thing (TM). As I understand, one goal of the guys doing mkinitrd is to include bash, a 800k program into the image. Why? So we don't have to choose and maintain 15 different shells. People talk about the 'balkanization' of a platform. I would call splitting packages up unecessarily the 'gentooification' of Fedora. If your 1% user base needs a package done slightly different, then it's something that IMHO should be done internally. I might be wrong here, and I would like to hear if there are any respin ideas or use cases that aren't for embedded/minimal systems that would need such ubiquitous fragmentation. (for non-native english speakers, ubiquitous means all encompassing, or thorough) -Yaakov -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
