Matthew Miller wrote:
> This is a good point; we're already pretty much awful on this point,
> and let's not make it worse. (On the other hand, modularity has the
> potential to help significantly on this point, as you should't need
> detailed metadata about what's _inside_ a module at runtime in normal
> circumstances.)
At that point, we stop being a distribution and become a salad bar of bits
and pieces that may or may not work together, where both look and feel
integration and functional features will end up disabled because they would
depend on libraries from another module, and that each contain their own
redundant copies of the same libraries. I think that is a huge step
backwards, and if actually fully implemented, will likely force me to switch
to a different distribution.
Kevin Kofler
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
