Lyndon Nerenberg wrote on 04/19/2016 05:24: > On 2016-04-18 8:17 PM, Alfred Perlstein wrote: >> Can someone on the "too many packages" campaign here explain to me how >> having too fine a granularity stops you from making macro packages >> containing packages? >> >> Because honestly I can't see how having granularity hurts at all when if >> someone wanted to make it less granular all they would have to do is >> make some meta-packages. Meta-packages doesn't hide anything (in list of packages and problems with dependencies) > It's the *I have to put it back together* part that's annoying. I > didn't break something that has worked, forever. It shouldn't be > incumbent on me to un-break someone else's work. +1 And you made another good point in previous e-mail about reviewed research. I would really like to see some docs about this topic. I have a feeling that some work on FreeBSD is against average users / admins and is good only for vedors of specialized or embedded devices. As many before - I am not against packaging base. It is good, but 10 - 20 packages will be enough. 800+ is too far from my feeling of "this is good feature". This seems like a nightmare to me. This was one of the reasons I don't like other OS distribuitions and I stayed with FreeBSD for more than 15 years. Miroslav LachmanReceived on Tue Apr 19 2016 - 05:37:30 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:41:04 UTC