FC4 slimfast slimfest

[Joshua Eichorn]

Jeff Spaleta wrote:

>On Mon, 21 Feb 2005 13:54:20 -0700, Joshua Eichorn <josh at bluga.net> wrote:
>  
>
>>It would be a shame to lose gnome-games, every computer needs easy
>>access to solitaire.
>>    
>>
>
>why? so office workers can be less productive?
>
>  
>
Because every graphical OS since 1984 has shipped with it, and it has 
more users then most other applications.

>>How about dropping some of the random documentation rpms we keep around,
>>they don't follow a pattern anyway (ie we have exim-doc but no
>>postfix-doc, we have python-doc but no php-doc or perl-doc)
>>    
>>
>
>Let me point out a hidden constraint for this fc4 timescale. You have
>to think in terms of 'srpms' subpackages can only be dropped..
>subpackages can not be moved out of Core into Extras. The -doc
>packages you describe are actualy subpackages built from the same srpm
>as the related runtime package. Its inappropriate to drop
>documentation completely.. and since they are subpackages from the
>same srpm you can't move them across the Core/Extras boundary. So
>really the packages you suggest are non-starters.. unless package can
>be re-engineered so that the docs are built from their own seperate
>srpms.
>
>  
>
We have dropped other large doc rpms in the past, its all the web 
anyway.  I'm not saying we can drop all the docs, but the docs for 
programming languages would be an easy drop and would mesh well with 
what has happened in the past (dropping php-manual between rh8-9 for 
example)

>-jef
>
>  
>
-josh