Petr Sabata (contyk(a)redhat.com) said:
> > Simply to make Fedora better. I'd like to make those
available for our users.
> > There are currently no other packages relying on this set (or rc, to be more
> > specific) in Fedora. That could change in the future, though.
>
> The question is - why does having incompatible plan9 implementations of
> common commands make Fedora 'better', outside of "having more
stuff"?
You could say the same about most of Fedora packages.
Right, I do. At some point, you have to decide whether you're producing
an operating system that's an 'integrated set of software ... that just
works',
or a huge repository of disparate projects.
'Better', giving people tools to use, to choose from. Fedora
isn't one of those
pure, minimalist distributions anyway. We have a lot of alternatives for a lot
of stuff. Some do more, some do less, some do the same but differently.
Yes, but as soon as people start using all of these 'multiple tools to
choose from', you then end up with things like 5 different cryptography
libraries that all need export controlled, and so on. For things that
are core system functionality, it's questionable the value of supporting
multiple different incompatible implementations simultaneously. I mean,
how many implementations of 'basename' do you really need in a distribution?
Bill