On Sat, 2006-01-21 at 09:12 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
Willem Riede wrote:
> On 01/20/2006 07:37:08 PM, Jesse Keating wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 2006-01-21 at 01:26 -0500, Igor Jagec wrote:
>> > Well, it still depends on Beagle :-/ Evolution is a great application,
>> > but the problem is that it provides more features than I need.
>> > Thunderbird is just perfect for me. Ok, I'll play a bit with
>> Evolution,
>> > maybe I figure that I really need some features like Calendar ;)
>> >
>> I think more to the point is that beagle requires evolution-sharp, and
>> evolution-sharp requires evolution.
>
>
> And that begs the question "why?". Leveraging a library is one thing,
> but forcing in the application against users wishes is just wrong.
>
> Willem Riede.
Can we cut the hyperbole to a minimum level?. Nobody is forcing any user
to install a application or Fedora itself. Can we reduce the library
dependencies or split packages into a more modular fashion is a good
question to ask though.
Or maybe, why does evolution-sharp require evolution, and not
evolution-data-server? Wouldn't beagle's interest in evolution be data
related, and therefore it make more sense for it to use e-d-s, not
evolution?
Rodd
--
"It's a fine line between denial and faith.
It's much better on my side"