On Sat, 2005-01-22 at 17:08 +0100, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
ok just to be devils advocate again; how is having an iso labeled
"Extras-KDE" different from having one additional iso in core that has
the kde packages (I'm not sure if kde fills an entire CD but it'll go
quite some way towards that anyway). In the first case you offer the
user the choice to download it or *not* download it if the user isn't
going to use KDE, in the case of KDE-in-core you force downloading that
same ISO on all users, regardless of whether they will install KDE or
not.
Your argument seems to be "but then I have to download an extra
iso"....
well you download that iso anyway, and not just you but everyone else
too.
You're right, the ISO argument is flawed and Rahul pointed this out too.
And that's not really the argument I was trying to make, but I can see
how it comes across like that.
For the record, I have no problem with KDE being on a separate ISO, as
long as the installer gives one the choice of installing from said ISO
at install time. In fact, I think a reorg of the ISOs could be a great
thing.
As I said in the email I just posted, my concern is more of a
maintainership issue of actually officially declaring it an Extras
package. Maybe it's a non-issue, but I still have that concern.
josh