On Tue, May 08, 2001 at 10:34:26PM -0400, Joey Hess wrote: > * Move control of what packages a task includes out of the hands of the > creator of the task, and into the hands of people who have commits to > some cvs repository somewhere[1].
Like boot-floppies CVS which every developer and a few non-developers have commit access to? Or moving them into the task package themselves, but not in the control record? Or shall we just forget I suggested that originally. Yes, clearly it's a power trip and I don't trust anyone else. Why, I'm evil and thoughtless and just plain baaad. > * Eliminate all usefulness of tasks except when manipulated by one > single special purpose tool (tasksel). (This includes making it > impossible to install a task and receive bugfix upgrades to it later.) Yeah, because hey, if the tools aren't written now (or at the very least mandated by policy) it'll be impossible to ever write them in future. > AJ asked for a concrete counterpropsal, and this is mine: If you really > want to do this, just go back to Bruce's system. Redo it so it's not so > blasted ugly and confusing, fix the self-destructive aspect, but use the > same idea. Which likely means just hardcoding the tasks and what > packages comprise them in tasksel, and when a task is selected, have apt > install all available packages that are in the task. "Forget all the code that exists and is working right now, and rewrite it based on this old code that everyone's forgotten." Feh. Cheers, aj, getting fed up with trying to help -- Anthony Towns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/> I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG signed mail preferred. ``_Any_ increase in interface difficulty, in exchange for a benefit you do not understand, cannot perceive, or don't care about, is too much.'' -- John S. Novak, III (The Humblest Man on the Net)
pgpQ6FBKcMoaF.pgp
Description: PGP signature
