ng0 <contact....@cryptolab.net> writes: > On 17-02-09 23:50:02, Ludovic Courtès wrote: >> ng0 <contact....@cryptolab.net> skribis: >> >> > On 17-02-09 17:50:04, Ludovic Courtès wrote: >> >> Hi ng0! >> >> >> >> contact....@cryptolab.net skribis: >> >> >> >> > This patch adds an proposed change to mumble, murmur as an output. >> >> >> >> I’m reluctant to “non-standard” outputs like this. The reason for >> >> multiple outputs should be to reduce the closure size for standards >> >> uses. What do we gain by not included murmurd in “out” in this case? >> >> >> >> Thanks, >> >> Ludo’. >> > >> > We remove the server component (murmurd) from the client component >> > (mumble). I imagine that if you run murmurd, you will not want mumble >> > in the same user profile. And if you run mumble, you probably don't >> > want murmurd. The default is a client, adding murmur output is logical. >> > But this is just my view.. I would not want a server unless I explicitly >> > expressed my intention to have it >> > >> > What do you think? >> >> I think the only reason to separate things usually is size, not >> “aesthetics.” So I’d be in favor of keeping both in the same output if >> there’s no size problem. >> > > Of course this is a theoretic issue, but the separation of server+client > where applicable when the nature of an application allows it makes sense > to me.
What does `guix size` say about mumble:murmur compared to mumble:out? If the server does not depend on any graphical features, I think a separate output makes sense. mumble alone is ~1GiB.
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
