lubuntu and the issue of norms by

Dan Kegel dank at
Thu Jun 14 13:10:36 UTC 2012

On Thu, Jun 14, 2012 at 5:50 AM, spir <denis.spir at> wrote:
> Going back to "share a minmal common set of norms": this may be an
> alternative, inside, what do you think? There may be a
> 2-stage set of norms, with a lightweight core and a set of optional
> features. Develpppers of tools and component who want them to be usable in
> lightweight would be encouraged to stick with the lightweight set of norms,
> and avoid optional heavy features.
> One problem is where to place the barrier between necessary and optional,
> light and heavy features?

What's an example of a heavyweight feature that causes lubuntu pain
(e.g. increases RAM requirements significantly)?
- Dan

More information about the Lubuntu-users mailing list