[csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs dialog

[Peter FELECAN]

Philip Brown <phil at bolthole.com> writes:

> On Sat, Feb 5, 2011 at 9:45 AM, Peter FELECAN <pfelecan at opencsw.org> wrote:
>>
>>> You can also consider googling for comments about why some people
>>> didnt like blastwave packaging. One of the complaints people blogged
>>> about, was because it duplicated packages already present in solaris.
>>> I dont think that attitude has suddenly changed either.
>>
>> That I know but it's not the same thing. Duplication of packages is not
>> the same issue that we discuss, which is payload size.
>
> It's not quite the same thing, but it tracks.
>
> Consider the issue of depending on some CSW version of libFoo, which
> is technically "newer" than /usr/lib/libFoo.
> If /usr/lib/libFoo is "good enough", then those people would prefer us
> to use that version, rather than the newer version.
>
> In essence, that's what libncurses is: a "newer" version of
> /usr/lib/libcurses.so
> And for many purposes, the "old version in /usr/lib" is "good enough".
>
> I'm sure there are ways for you to further split hairs on this, but
> lets not bother going down that road.
>  I dont dispute that there are cases where ncurses is more useful.
> I hope you will give me the same courtesy in conceding that there are
> cases where it is not.

I courteously concedes that software with less features, less quality,
viz. bugs, can be a choice for some people. And this is not
tetrapyloctomy but masochism.
-- 
Peter