Julio Merino <jmmv84%gmail.com@localhost> writes: > Heh, pretty much the rationale I was following in my gnome-lite :-) I > like it. I don't like the word -lite, because it's not an upstream term and not proper English. > I was pondering two different approaches though: > > - Minimal desktop as the one you propose. Don't install any > application for which you have an alternative that you will want to > install (e.g. epiphany vs. firefox). Maybe install some stuff for > which you don't have alternatives, such as the panel applets. I would call this gnome-minimal. The idea would be that you can log in, have metacity/nautilus/panel/gnome-terminal plus normal applets package. Maybe also evince. Perhaps avoid samba in gvfs :-) Once you accept metacity and nautilus as not bloated, then the idea would be to not add anything else that counts as bloated. The idea is that almost every person who does want to run gnome at all will want (or not mind) everything in this package. I think this is what you have articulated. > - More functional desktop, but avoiding huge dependencies (specially > those that are developer-specific such as python and mono bindings). > Include a set of packages "blessed" by us, not restricted to match > upstream. > > (Sure, these two approaches are so different that they may warrant > different packages.) I don't know how to draw a line for this that will make large numbers of people happy. But I'm happy for you to add even several such packages. I would like to see some of the dependencies of meta-pkgs/gnome move to meta-pkgs/gnome-minimal, and for meta-pkgs/gnome to depend on gnome-minimal. But if that's contentious, I am fine with just adding gnome-minimal (and I really don't care much what it's called) and then I'll ignore meta-pkgs/gnome. BTW, I still have gnome-base 2.24 installed on my system to cause many of the dependencies to still have a depending package, and I tell pkg_rr not to upgrade gnome-base. That way my "delete all automatically-installed packages that do not have any depending packages" process does not remove them. I like the gnome-base name, but it seems to have the baggage that it appears to correspdong to something upstream declared. (IMHO it's a GNOME project bug that a minimal subset isn't defined, but we don't need to argue that with them.)
Attachment:
pgpaDbE8roJok.pgp
Description: PGP signature