Le 12/02/2019 à 19:16, Gaetan Bisson a écrit : > [2019-02-12 16:40:08 +0100] Bruno Pagani via arch-dev-public: >> Just in case it wasn’t clear, my answer would have been mostly the same >> as Eli’s. >> >> So, Gaetan, Allan and Bartłomiej (or anyone else for that matter), do >> you have further comments/questions regarding this, does the existence >> of the base group alongside the arch/minimal-system now makes sense or >> would you still prefer to go without it? > Allan and I have both stated that we don't want to introduce a new group > since we believe it would be highly redundant with base. > > Nothing new has been said since our last messages except Eli's post > which argues that the base group is largely inadequate in its current > state. This further supports our proposal that base should be improved > instead of introducing a new group. > > So I really don't see what arguments could have changed our minds... > It's also strange to me how you can concur with Eli's post without > agreeing with our conclusions.
We did not read Eli the same way apparently. To me, Eli was answering what should be in the base group but not in the arch/minimal-system metapackage. And then I agree with what he listed. So my question is: given what we propose for the minimal metapackage (see below) and what Eli listed as being useful in a base group when seeing this one as a convenient helper, do you still think that keeping the base group is problematic? If so, then I propose we just move on with removing the base group and implementing the metapackage, I care much more for getting this one set up than for keeping base. > To go forward I suggest you propose a clear definition of the perfect > "minimal system" group you'd want to have, along with a proposed list of > packages. The list is available in the very first post (by Levente) of this thread. ;) > When consensus is reached, we adopt this list of packages for > base and put this definition on the wiki. As later clarified by Levente, not for base, but for a new metapackage with a different name to avoid confusion (whether we keep the base group or not I think). Regards, Bruno
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
