Universe Recommends for packages in main
steve.langasek at canonical.com
Fri Jul 11 20:39:38 BST 2008
On Mon, Jul 07, 2008 at 11:00:30AM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote:
> Martin Pitt schrieb:
> > Matt Zimmerman [2008-07-06 14:58 +0100]:
> >> I thought we had included the oo.o Java bits until recently, and they were
> >> dropped in error.
> > It was not really an "oops, where are they" error, but a desperate
> > decision to keep the CDs within limits again, and compensate for
> > ever-growing OO.o packages.
> sorry no, this is absolutely wrong. there was nothing to compensate because of
> OOo, the packages did even shrink compared to gutsy. The packages were dropped
> accidentally and then forgotten to be re-added. OOo java was just the victim at
> this time.
Not exactly true. The packages weren't dropped accidentally; they were
dropped quite deliberately due to size constraints and on the belief that
only OOo-base was substantially impacted by java's absence, and this
decision was re-evaluated towards the end of the hardy release cycle based
on your concerns that this was a mistake. (And this decision stood because
there wasn't enough room to be found to put these packages back in.)
As for the packages shrinking compared to gutsy, that's certainly true for
the .debs, but I'm not aware that this was the case for the unpacked
packages - so space on the livefs was still an issue in any case.
Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS
Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world.
Ubuntu Developer http://www.debian.org/
slangasek at ubuntu.com vorlon at debian.org
More information about the ubuntu-devel