Subject: Re: gimp documentation package
To: Robert Elz <email@example.com>
From: Berndt Josef Wulf <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 12/27/2004 21:41:01
On Monday 27 December 2004 19:38, Robert Elz wrote:
> Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2004 12:24:48 +1030
> From: Berndt Josef Wulf <email@example.com>
> Message-ID: <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> | I would appreciate any feedback before committing it to the tree.
> Why does it have a dependency on gimp?
Because it documents and describes the behavior of the version of gimp=20
installed by the pkgsrc, well this was the idea.
> It looks to me as if it would be useful without gimp being
> installed (some of us like to read docs without necessarily
> even deciding to use the thing documented - and there's also
> the issue of installing docs on one system, and gimp on another).
The gimp documents are available online, ideal for those that want to read =
documentation before downloading the software, and hence this argument=20
doesn't stick. Installation of the docs and apps on different systems doesn=
make sense either, as gimp expects them to be installed in their standard=20
location. Without it, gimp will not be able to access these files and provi=
a functional help menu.
> Dependencies should only be used when a package can't work (compile,
> run, get fetched, ...) without another one to make use of, never just
> because someone believes that this package isn't going to be very useful
> if you don't have that one as well.
As the documents are already formatted and don't need further processing,=20
removing the dependency will have no adverse affect other than accommodatin=
a few users and their fantasies ;-)
I will remove the dependency and many thanks for your feedback.=20
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.6 (NetBSD)
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----