guideline-isms leading to dependency bloats

[David Timms]

Tony Nelson wrote:
> At 6:00 PM +0200 6/15/07, Axel Thimm wrote:
>> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1;
>> 	protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="tctmm6wHVGT/P6vA"
>> Content-Disposition: inline
>>
>> On Fri, Jun 15, 2007 at 08:58:34AM -0400, Matthias Clasen wrote:
>>> On Fri, 2007-06-15 at 12:38 +0200, Axel Thimm wrote:
>>>
>>>> Please decide on what is better, if you want the FPC to exempt
>>>> fedora-logos I'll bring it up there. But maybe the subpackage split is
>>>> preferred.
>>> It has been extensively discussed that splitting is not an option
>>> because legal wants us to keep all trademarked images in a single
>>> package.
>> Spliting is *the option* along with teaching legal not to impose such
>> braindead non-technical issues.
>  ...
> 
> I would guess that Legal wants there to be a single package whose removal
> removes all trademarked artwork.  I think their purpose is to make it
> simple for third parties to do legal re-issues from source, as CentOS does.
> Perhaps third parties also like having a single RPM to redo from scratch.
Actually, couldn't that be done if the package was split into 
subpackages, and the new subpackage containing logos required at boot 
became a requirement of fedora-logos ?

If you then pirut or yum remove fedora-logos, fedora-logos-boot would 
get uninstalled as well ? And legal stays happy :)

DaveT.