Bug#515214: I don't think we need to add complexity to X on Debian
Hi all knowing that the BTS is *not* a voting system and with deep respect about the work done in Debian and also in the X-system, i still feel the need to raise my voice. As a long term Debian user, running multiple servers and enduser systems across multiple releases i feel a bit scared about the current direction. I've always choosen Debian due to its simplicity, due to the possibility to trim it down to a bare minimum which fits my needs. As time goes by, i feel this is getting less and less possible. I absolutely see the point in HAL, DBus, and all the other technologies, i understand the need for it and i certainly have nothing agains it. But please, stick to the bare minimum, only depending on what's really needed and leave everything else to recommendations. (that's the defininition of Depends for me...) Just my two cents, thanks and kind regards, Pascal signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Bug#515214: I don't think we need to add complexity to X on Debian
On Mon Apr 13 10:41, Robert Grimm wrote: On Sun, 12 April 2009, you wrote: Please do not accept any of the patches. Most users want things to just work. Anyone who wants to keep their systems hal-free is capable of configuring xorg accordingly and should be able to make a filler package using equivs to fulfill the dependency with no need to increase the complexity for the majority. In my opinion, HAL is unneeded complexity. Furthermore, the referenced most users are perfectly capable to install recommends. This is the default behavior in Debian. If they like to install every piece of software, that makes their life easier, why wouldn't they install recommends? Concur. We _have_ a perfectly good system for saying please install this unless you know what you are doing; it's 'recommends'. It doesn't force people to hack around the issue (and equivs _is_ hacking around the issue), but it does get installed by default unless people know what they are doing. Not only that, but you also have a metapackage, which is what people generally install by default. Add a hard depends to that by all means, but you don't need to _require_ it. I'm not even likely to want to install it without hal myself, but I see no reason whatsoever not to allow people a hal-less X if they want. Matt -- Matthew Johnson signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#515214: I don't think we need to add complexity to X on Debian
On Sun, 12 April 2009, you wrote: Please do not accept any of the patches. Most users want things to just work. Anyone who wants to keep their systems hal-free is capable of configuring xorg accordingly and should be able to make a filler package using equivs to fulfill the dependency with no need to increase the complexity for the majority. In my opinion, HAL is unneeded complexity. Furthermore, the referenced most users are perfectly capable to install recommends. This is the default behavior in Debian. If they like to install every piece of software, that makes their life easier, why wouldn't they install recommends? Rob signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#515214: I don't think we need to add complexity to X on Debian
Please do not accept any of the patches. Most users want things to just work. Anyone who wants to keep their systems hal-free is capable of configuring xorg accordingly and should be able to make a filler package using equivs to fulfill the dependency with no need to increase the complexity for the majority. Thanks, -- Gustavo Noronha k...@debian.org Debian Project -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-x-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
