Including OO templates in fc4

[Kyrre Ness Sjobak]

lør, 05.03.2005 kl. 22.26 skrev Nicolas Mailhot:
> Le dimanche 06 mars 2005 à 08:00 +1100, Rodd Clarkson a écrit :
> > On Sat, 2005-03-05 at 18:50 +0100, Kyrre Ness Sjobak wrote:
> > > lør, 05.03.2005 kl. 16.49 skrev Josh Boyer:
> > > > On Sat, 2005-03-05 at 16:08 +0100, Kyrre Ness Sjobak wrote:
> > 
> > > > > I know that we are aleady pushed for space, but including a few kb's of
> > > > > templates to the huge package OO already is, seems nothing but
> > > > > reasonable, especially considering the end-user benefit.
> > > > 
> > > > I think this is a Fedora Extras candidate.  Entire packages that are
> > > > only a few KiBs are being pushed out to Extras, so I don't think we want
> > > > to add anything that isn't needed to the core OO package.
> > 
> > > I probably could, but i simply just don't think this is an extras
> > > candidate. Users simply expect templates to be there, or at least a box
> > > "you need to install xxx from yyy to get templates".
> > > 
> > As I understand it, many (all) of the packages being moved from Core to
> > Extras are being 'pushed out' (as you put it) because they offer
> > duplicate functionality.
> > 
> > In the case of adding some templates for OOo, then your wouldn't be
> > adding another package for which the functionality was already available
> > (but might not be your preferred package), you are actually adding very
> > useful functionality for many, many users who will only use Fedora for
> > word processing, web browsing and email 
> 
> I agree a few carefully selected templates belong in core (maybe only
> one that uses fedora colors;) - don't underestimate the marketing value
> of this kind of stuff) but the bulk of them is clearly extras material.
> 

Agreed. Put some good ones in core, and the bulk in extras.