static libraries' policy: possible solution

[Dmitry Butskoy]

Nicolas Mailhot wrote:

>Le mercredi 16 novembre 2005 à 20:50 +0300, Dmitry Butskoy a écrit :
>
>  
>
>>IMO, Fedora is not an ordinary distro. 
>>    
>>
>
>Fedora is not an ordinary distro because Red Hat never balked at doing
>ambitious changes (gnome, gcc 2.96, UTF-8 locale) before everyone else.
>  
>
Sure!

But in all these cases the alternative opportunities have been kept for 
the users. Noone drops KDE completely (due to GNOME), there was 
compat-egcs (or something similar) for gcc, the users still can use 
non-UTF8 locales.

I suggest something similar. Do not drop static libs totally, keep them 
(at least for a while) at some location (like debuginfo packages are kept).

Note, I not suggest to keep static libs in the devel packages! The whole 
standard Fedora distro will be as you want -- without static libs 
(comps, CD/DVD, repodata, etc.)
The only thing that is necessary for the packager is to edit about 40 
symbols in the spec file... (without any changes in the future).

Really this idea is so inadmissible that causes an allergy?.. :( Not for 
you personally, many other people think similarly. I understand their 
opinion, I agree with them, I just suggest some consensus. But it seems 
that they against the consent in this problem. I cannot understand, why...

>If you want a consensus-driven distro which changes 2 years after
>everyone else go look some other place.
>  
>
What distro could you recommend for this?


~buc

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-extras-list/attachments/20051117/4a17c76e/attachment.htm>