On Tue, Jan 25, 2011 at 3:48 PM, Rahul Sundaram <metherid@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 01/25/2011 08:17 PM, drago01 wrote: >> It is not indented as alternative to in the way you might think it is >> just a fallback for older hardware and/or crappy drivers. >> Hence the name "fallback". > > Call it whatever you want. It is a alternative in the sense that you > cannot run both at the same time. There is absolutely no technical > reason why GNOME Panel would require GNOME Shell as a dependency. > >> If you really care that much about it >> suggest a better way (no a release note entry is not it) > > If you are going to dismiss suggestions without any explanation, why > would I bother? I though it was obvious that requiring the user to go read the release notes to get the expected user experience is just wrong. > If you insist that a artificial dependency is the right > way, then not much can be done about it. It isn't ideal but the costs are few megabytes of disk space versus the benefit of a better upgrade experience. Unless we have a better way (which we should have to handle cases like this), I'd take that cost. -- test mailing list test@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
