Kubuntu and main/universe

[Scott Kitterman]

On Wednesday, May 23, 2012 03:06:03 PM Harald Sitter wrote:
> On Wed, May 23, 2012 at 2:57 PM, Scott Kitterman <ubuntu at kitterman.com> 
wrote:
> > On Wednesday, May 23, 2012 08:44:37 AM Jonathan Thomas wrote:
> > ...
> > 
> >> I think moving from main would be beneficial to us. Currently, there
> >> are several Kubuntu packages with optional build-dependencies on
> >> universe components providing extra functionality that we cannot build
> >> against. In addition to us missing out on a few nice features, it also
> >> makes packaging diffs with Debian just a bit larger, which is
> >> undesirable. In my experience, I don't think there's any protest
> >> amongst the Kubuntu team about whether or not a move from main ->
> >> universe is desirable, but I'll let them speak for themselves. ;-)
> > 
> > ...
> > 
> > This is a good point that I forgot to write.  My preference to stay in
> > Main is not strong as I see the benefits of moving, but I would still
> > prefer to stay in Main if we can.
> 
> Does it have to be either or? Couldn't we mixed seed?
> i.e. have most of our stuff in main, and when necessary demote/keep
> packages in universe to accommodate the build dep issue highlighted
> 
> FWIW, having to compromise on available features because a build dep
> was not worth getting it into main (or simply does not qualify for
> legal reasons) always annoyed me.

We could split the seeds into a Main/on the $ISO and a Universe/on the $ISO 
seeds.  That would complicate the decision making about what needs to go in 
Main considerably if our images are built to include Universe.  Technically 
it's feasible, but I don't think there's another case of an set of packages 
split this way.  Edubuntu has a bunch of stuff in Main, but that's only because 
of overlap between it's packages and Gnome/KDE.

Scott K