On Sun, 2003-01-19 at 15:15, Joe Drew wrote: > On Sun, 2003-01-19 at 12:00, Colin Walters wrote: > > I'm thinking about making a "gnome-core" package which would serve that > > role, and then having our "gnome" package be very featureful; to the > > point of possibly say recommending abiword, evolution, galeon, and > > rhythmbox for example (and gnome-vfs-extras2 of course). > > Which would be the selection for the Desktop task - gnome-core or gnome?
I think that in these days of large hard drives, it makes sense to have the default be "gnome". > Oh, and you'll want to choose a different name, since gnome-core already > exists (and is a gnome 1 package, apparently). gnome-base? Ah, point. Hmm. I don't think the gnome-core package is useful anymore; it conflicts with the GNOME 2 stuff. We should have it removed from the archive. Christian, do you agree? Then maybe we can go ahead and use the gnome-core name. > I agree that saying apt-get install gnome should give you a much more > featureful desktop than just what GNOME says is equal to GNOME, in the > same way the Red Hat desktop is more than just "GNOME." Cool.
