Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=744339 --- Comment #25 from Jiri Hladky <hladky.j...@gmail.com> 2011-11-23 18:43:47 EST --- (In reply to comment #23) > (In reply to comment #21) > > Hi Richard, > > > > That's fine. I'm actually surprised you waited this long :) :-) Well, so far I have very good relationship with the author and I consider asking a question and then just go ahead without waiting for response to be rude. But it's now taking too long... > Not specific to this package but one reason I suggested breaking the package > up > is this: > > What if a program had a simple GUI that required QT4 or GTK? When you're > packaging it, you think, "Hey, it's only X Kb, why create a separate > package?", > not realizing that it's not the size of the binary that's the problem, but all > the dependencies of QT or GTK that it pulls in. It's entirely plausible that > someone might want access to a library without wanting the GUI interface on a > system with little disk space, or they may just want a minimal install. Yes, good point. I was thinking about it last week and I agree that it's a good approach. Initially I was uncertain why to split such a small package but you hit the nail on the head that it's not size but structure of the package what matters. Thanks again Jirka -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
