Hi Vivien, Am Dienstag, dem 05.12.2023 um 21:55 +0100 schrieb Vivien Kraus: > Dear guix, > > On the one hand, we have this list of packages: > https://ftp2.nluug.nl/windowing/gnome/teams/releng/44.6/versions > > On the other hand, we have the propagated-inputs of the gnome > package. > > Should we update the latter so that it contains everything from the > former? No.
> What should we do about the comments dividing the propagated- > inputs into categories? Where do these categories come from? The categories are roughly inferred from a previous categorisation of GNOME Apps. It is a little arcane and should probably be updated to reflect <https://apps.gnome.org/de/#core> (roughly). Note that we'll still be using the Core Apps from GNOME 44, which are listed in [1]. > Should we preserve them? How do we know which package goes to which > category? We should try to update them and better keep with upstream terms. I think it also makes sense to split the gnome meta-package into multiple meta packages and adjust the gnome-desktop service accordingly. For one, we do need a gnome-shell-meta that has everything required to get a running gnome-shell, even without any of the other core applications. Then, gnome-core-main, gnome-core-mobile and gnome-core-tools could hold the main, mobile and developer tools in the core apps respectively. > The gnome package disables eog on 32-bit machines because it depends > on librsvg-next. It seems a bit outdated to me, as most of gnome > won’t work on 32-bit machines, not only eog. Should we try and find > which ones work on 32-bit systems? Seeing how GNOME 45 deprecates eog in favour of loupe, yet another bootstrap and build system nightmare, we should anyhow look into what's buildable on 32-bit machines and offer suitable replacements. I'm very much a proponent of reducing the amount of software on our GNOME stack, not piling yet another heap of checksums onto it and calling dependency management done. Cheers [1] https://blogs.gnome.org/mcatanzaro/2023/05/10/gnome-core-apps-update/
