On Sat, Dec 19, 2009 at 02:18:22PM +0100, Christoph Egger wrote:
> Hm I'd first consider the size of each of the plugin packages. If
> they're relatively small you could consider grouping them, seems
> like that it is already somewhat done in core, database, encoder,
> metadata, ... if these are not depending on each other it could be
> a sensible choice. If they're really small all in one is ok as
> well.
Equally important in this decision is the size and number of
dependencies for each package. While the packages themselves may be
small, the fine-grained split may have been intended more to avoid
the user installing a ton of dependencies for particular features
they didn't need anyway.
--
{ IRL(Jeremy_Stanley); PGP(9E8DFF2E4F5995F8FEADDC5829ABF7441FB84657);
SMTP(fu...@yuggoth.org); IRC(fu...@irc.yuggoth.org#ccl); ICQ(114362511);
AIM(dreadazathoth); YAHOO(crawlingchaoslabs); FINGER(fu...@yuggoth.org);
MUD(fu...@katarsis.mudpy.org:6669); WWW(http://fungi.yuggoth.org/); }
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
