mpg321 decision needed

[Christian Pearce]

This is a fair argument.  I think mpg321 being the issue it is makes people want to justify reasons for doing something.  I believe the comment was "mostly servers", so the effect would be midigated.  But I don't want to see us pulling KDE, gnome or X either, even though I don't use them as workstations.

--
Christian Pearce
http://www.commnav.com



Troy Dawson said:
> 
> Warren Togami wrote:
> ...
> > I personally feel that removing mpg321 or crippling its functionality in 
> > Legacy is not much of a loss, since the majority of Legacy users are 
> > servers.  Maybe some businesses use Legacy for workstations, but think 
> > of a broken MP3 decoder as productivity gain? =)
> ...
> 
> I have some problems with this attitude.
> Why?
> First, because many of our systems are NOT servers.  We have a very high 
> percentage of experimentors that are running 7.3 on desktops.
> Second, once you start walking down that path of 'servers only' then anything 
> is fair game.  KDE will go out, alot of gnome too, shoot, eventually X since 
> you don't really need X for web or mail servers.
> 
> Now, if we have license issues, that's fine.  I'll just find and/or make the 
> patches elsewhere.  Though it would be good to have a list somewhere that says 
> which one's we can't do because of this problem.
> If we also don't feel the security problem is bad enough to warrent the time 
> it takes, I have no problem there either.
> 
> I just don't wnat to see Fedora-legacy be for 'servers only'
> 
> Thanks
> Troy
> -- 
> __________________________________________________
> Troy Dawson  dawson at fnal.gov  (630)840-6468
> Fermilab  ComputingDivision/CSS  CSI Group
> __________________________________________________
> 
> 
> --
> fedora-legacy-list mailing list
> fedora-legacy-list at redhat.com
> http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-legacy-list
>