Alan DuBoff wrote:

>On Tuesday 16 May 2006 01:55 pm, Eric Boutilier wrote:
>  
>
>>Yeah, in my opinion it should be easy to conceive a set of packages that
>>even eschews Firefox in favor of something more efficent (which is to
>>say, less complex to maintain, as well as smaller/faster), like Dillo
>>(dillo.org) for example.
>>    
>>
>
>Well, that's going to the extreme, no? ...
>

I'd say that depends.

In the context of this thread (a how-to document for coming up with 
package-sets for desktop/server "appliance" implementations) that 
question is up to the implementor.

Eric


Reply via email to