| 1 |
On Fri, Jul 20, 2018 at 9:05 AM <nado@××××××××××.be> wrote: |
| 2 |
> |
| 3 |
> I’m not sure I was clear enough in what 13.0 would mean : basically, its current content would be |
| 4 |
> delegated to common, and 13.0 would keep only things needed to have minimal breakages/conflicts. |
| 5 |
> And we would keep the current directory-like inheritance. |
| 6 |
> |
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
Your proposal was clear enough. I was just pointing out that it might |
| 9 |
make more sense to make common the thing that is minimal to prevent |
| 10 |
breakage/conflict, and make 13.0 something that could not be reliably |
| 11 |
inherited by the things below it in the hierarchy. Ie, it wouldn't |
| 12 |
really be a hierarchy any longer. |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
And, honestly, it wasn't necessarily intended as a design that we |
| 15 |
ought to adopt, but more to get people to stop and think about the |
| 16 |
issues with how we're doing it today. |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
Some of it might just be user mindset. A lot of people are drawn to |
| 19 |
Gentoo by minimalism, and I'd count myself among them in general. |
| 20 |
However, that leads to a certain tendency to start out with the most |
| 21 |
minimal starting point within Gentoo, and I don't know that this is a |
| 22 |
good idea. Even the desktop profile for Gentoo is pretty minimal |
| 23 |
compared to a lot of distros out there. While you can get Gentoo |
| 24 |
running with busybox and such and I completely support having profiles |
| 25 |
to enable this, I'm not sure this is the sort of thing that we want to |
| 26 |
point new users towards as a starting point. |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
-- |
| 29 |
Rich |
Archives