RFC: shipping external-tree plugins

[Robert Collins]

On Tue, 2008-07-29 at 03:09 -0500, Matthew D. Fuller wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 29, 2008 at 04:51:22PM +1000 I heard the voice of
> Robert Collins, and lo! it spake thus:
> > On Tue, 2008-07-29 at 15:19 +1000, Martin Pool wrote:
> > 
> > > It might be more appropriate to keep 'make dist' producing just
> > > the core tarball.
> > 
> > I'd like to hear from packagers for $distros before we do that.
> 
> Well, speaking as a packager, I'd be somewhat inclined to dike out
> something like e.g. bzrtools, which adds dependancies, and is already
> packaged separately (which would be impossible were it integrated).

The Fedora packager was asking for a bundle of many different plugins
rather than separate ones. Is it the fact of dependencies that makes you
inclined to not include bzrtools as bundled? 

Its easy enough to make bzr generate N tarballs; or to say 'packagers
can ship how they like' etc.

I think the key points from an upstream perspective are:
 - we want [set of bundled things] to be the default minimum install
 - naturally components which are missing dependencies will not operate

-Rob

-- 
GPG key available at: <http://www.robertcollins.net/keys.txt>.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/bazaar/attachments/20080730/3419624a/attachment.pgp