Re: midnight commander package fixes, opinions wanted
On 17-03-06 11:55:27, Efraim Flashner wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 01, 2017 at 05:01:23PM +, ng0 wrote:
> > On 17-03-01 16:58:41, ng0 wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > I already fixed some of the open issues with our package of 'mc'.
> > >
> > > I think people will expect features to just work and not being broken
> > > (as they are right now).
> > > My personal opinion ignored, how do you want to proceed? The vim way
> > > where we have $package (basic, as small as it gets) and $package-full
> > > (with all the features you can have enabled)?
> > >
> > > I'd like to hear your opionion so that I can proceed fixing mc with
> > > what we agreed on.
> > >
> >
> > And also your opinion, I don't know what an opionion is but it sounds
> > like opium combined with onion and I don't want that.
> >
>
> I've been sitting on a patch for ranger for a while. I also couldn't
> decide between packaging just ranger or also linking in the various
> programs it calls.
>
> I think that if mc would use libcaca to display an image, and just
> installing libcaca in profile would satisfy that dependancy, then
> leaving it out is "not great, but acceptable".
>
> --
> Efraim Flashner אפרים פלשנר
> GPG key = A28B F40C 3E55 1372 662D 14F7 41AA E7DC CA3D 8351
> Confidentiality cannot be guaranteed on emails sent or received unencrypted
It's not that easy. The references to applications are absolute
using '/usr/{bin,sbin}' and similar ones.
Maybe it's possible to just use the application name, but that depends
on the context in the code, etc.
Re: midnight commander package fixes, opinions wanted
On 17-03-01 17:01:23, ng0 wrote: > On 17-03-01 16:58:41, ng0 wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I already fixed some of the open issues with our package of 'mc'. > > > > I think people will expect features to just work and not being broken > > (as they are right now). > > My personal opinion ignored, how do you want to proceed? The vim way > > where we have $package (basic, as small as it gets) and $package-full > > (with all the features you can have enabled)? > > > > I'd like to hear your opionion so that I can proceed fixing mc with > > what we agreed on. > > > > And also your opinion, I don't know what an opionion is but it sounds > like opium combined with onion and I don't want that. > For the lack of reaction for a long time, due to whatever reasons, I will simply propose that we go the way of vim and vim-full. 'mc-full' will have many more dependencies than our current 'mc' and should in the end be fully functional, while 'mc' will still complain about missing features. The description of mc-full shall reflect that you get full functionality with this application variant. Anyone who wants this, feel free to pick it up and fix the related bug.
Re: midnight commander package fixes, opinions wanted
On Wed, Mar 01, 2017 at 05:01:23PM +, ng0 wrote: > On 17-03-01 16:58:41, ng0 wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I already fixed some of the open issues with our package of 'mc'. > > > > I think people will expect features to just work and not being broken > > (as they are right now). > > My personal opinion ignored, how do you want to proceed? The vim way > > where we have $package (basic, as small as it gets) and $package-full > > (with all the features you can have enabled)? > > > > I'd like to hear your opionion so that I can proceed fixing mc with > > what we agreed on. > > > > And also your opinion, I don't know what an opionion is but it sounds > like opium combined with onion and I don't want that. > I've been sitting on a patch for ranger for a while. I also couldn't decide between packaging just ranger or also linking in the various programs it calls. I think that if mc would use libcaca to display an image, and just installing libcaca in profile would satisfy that dependancy, then leaving it out is "not great, but acceptable". -- Efraim Flashner אפרים פלשנר GPG key = A28B F40C 3E55 1372 662D 14F7 41AA E7DC CA3D 8351 Confidentiality cannot be guaranteed on emails sent or received unencrypted signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: midnight commander package fixes, opinions wanted
On 17-03-01 16:58:41, ng0 wrote: > Hi, > > I already fixed some of the open issues with our package of 'mc'. > > I think people will expect features to just work and not being broken > (as they are right now). > My personal opinion ignored, how do you want to proceed? The vim way > where we have $package (basic, as small as it gets) and $package-full > (with all the features you can have enabled)? > > I'd like to hear your opionion so that I can proceed fixing mc with > what we agreed on. > And also your opinion, I don't know what an opionion is but it sounds like opium combined with onion and I don't want that.
midnight commander package fixes, opinions wanted
Hi, I already fixed some of the open issues with our package of 'mc'. I think people will expect features to just work and not being broken (as they are right now). My personal opinion ignored, how do you want to proceed? The vim way where we have $package (basic, as small as it gets) and $package-full (with all the features you can have enabled)? I'd like to hear your opionion so that I can proceed fixing mc with what we agreed on.
