Re: GNOME 2.26 module inclusion discussion heats up

[Lennart Poettering <mztabzr 0pointer de>]

On Fri, 16.01.09 17:12, Josselin Mouette (joss debian org) wrote:

> Le vendredi 16 janvier 2009 à 10:55 -0500, Matthias Clasen a écrit :
> > But this is not a runtime decision. Either your distro is using
> > pulseaudio (and it should)
> 
> Again, this cannot be a distribution choice!
> 
> We can ship PA by default and make everything possible to get the best
> of it, but breaking systems where it is not installed is not an option,
> given the number of setups that don’t work with it.

Hmm. Somehow I get the feeling that the only distribution where this
really matters is Debian -- because you guys want to ship all and
everything and leave the user the decision what he uses and what he
doesn't. (I mean, you guys even include OSS4!) The other distributions
do an informed decision whether they want to adopt PA or not and then
integrate it fully or not. 

Now, that Debian works that way is something I accept, and not even
criticise. However what I don't see here is why this should hold
upstream back and requires us to hack kludges for you that only you
need.

I also don't follow why this compile time decision really is that bad
for you at all. I mean, you guys ship a lot of packages in multiple
versions with different compile settings. That starts with the kernel,
but continues with VIM, with emacs and gazillions of other
packages. You guys even invented the alternatives system just for
this!

If someone wants to use or get rid of PA on a Debian system he
probably tries to do so with the package manager first anyway. So
what's the big problem in provide multiple versions of the packages in
question -- one with and one without PA support?

Lennart

-- 
Lennart Poettering                        Red Hat, Inc.
lennart [at] poettering [dot] net         ICQ# 11060553
http://0pointer.net/lennart/           GnuPG 0x1A015CC4