On Thu, 21 Nov 2002, John H. Robinson, IV wrote:
Richard Braakman wrote:
We're not _removing_ anything, we're providing an integrated system.
in this cotext, it seems that upstream galeon _includes_ those
bookmarks (redhat, slackware, et al). to _remove_ those bookmarks is a
_removal_ for non-technical reasons.
iff upstream has no such bookmarks, (ie: cnn, msn, aol), then we have
absolutely no need to add them.
iff upstream had _no_ bookmarks at all, then we can add those that we
deem as important for _our_ users (www.debian.org, packages.d.o, et al).
i see a _big_ difference between value added, and value removed for the
purposes of branding.
to clarify: if the bookmarks stay or go, i will not argue. it is up to
the maintainer, and i will happily abide by his decision. when asked for
my opinion (which, i was) i am of the opinion that arbitrarily removing
them serves no useful purposes. putting them in a Other Distros leper
colony sub-menu would be fine. ensuring the Debian bookmarks were above
the others would be fine, too.
change for changes sake should be minimised.
Personally, if upstream thought it was a good idea to have a bookmark, then
the package maintainer should consider keeping it, even if it is under a
submenu. I like the idea of moving to a simple uniform bookmark list, but
I think it would be a good idea to preserve maintainer approved upstream
bookmarks somewhere easily accessible. (By maintainer approved, I mean the
maintainer should be able to arbitrarily decide, taking into account any
bugs filed against their package).
Drew Daniels
