On 2012-07-13 17:56, Christian PERRIER wrote:
It installs kde-standard that actually install juk.
So there's indeed no need for Yet Another Multimedia Player. If you
thing that amarok should replace juk, then please file a bug report
against kde-standard.
Amarok is not "Yet Another Multimedia Player", unless you have something
other than JuK in mind as reference. Amarok is not strictly superior to
JuK since it is a lot larger, and surely generally more heavyweight. On
a business install, having JuK must be enough. But for most "personal"
computers, Amarok is a better choice. As evidence, even though JuK is
installed by default while Amarok isn't, Amarok has more than twice as
many votes as Amarok (2322 vs 927).
I cannot figure out how I computed Amarok's size as 78 MB. In any case,
documentation was now split into amarok-doc, and Amarok's current size
(2.6~beta1+75.g47e75df-1) is now just 45 MB if excluding amarok-doc
(which is merely suggested by amarok), which is a lot better. It would
probably be best to install JuK or Amarok depending on the target
system's power, but failing infrastructure to facilitate that, and
considering that using a single player would be more consistent, I
believe Amarok should indeed replace JuK as the default music player for
KDE, given this new number. I believe the proportion of PCs which will
lack power to prefer Amarok over JuK by the time we release 8 should be
negligible.
I agree it would be best if the KDE team could manage which packages are
recommended, however, it's not clear that installing Amarok fits in
kde-standard's scope. I asked for a clarification of kde-standard in
#666968.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/5002fbf2.9050...@gmail.com
