On Mon, Aug 12, 2013 at 02:46:27AM +0200, Armin K. wrote: > > "Rather than offering you the illusion of the free choice, I'll take the > liberty of choosing for you." > [snip]
I understand where you are coming from, even though I loathe the example (pulse - for me it doesn't bring any benefits, and just complicates things). It seems a plausible stance to take throughout BLFS, but I guess the likely consequence will be that exactly one desktop environment will be supported (and 'startx' will be regarded as an intermediate step on the way). I'm not sure that many of our users will like that. OTOH, since I can't build LFS svn at the moment, you can feel free to disregard my comments until such time as I can again contribute :-) Seriously, BLFS used to be about providing choice. Some of the past deecisions meant that editing was hard (e.g. building things like TeX for docs), but people seemed to mostly manage to get working systems. Or perhaps they just gave up - I've no idea (I only see the mails which appear on the lists). Maybe the scope of BLFS is too broad ? (yes, I dread writing that because it may open up the "separate books" discussion again, but unless there are enough active developers / editors then the project goes nowhere. ĸen -- das eine Mal als Tragödie, das andere Mal als Farce -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
