Quoting Joey Hess ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): > I think you're being inconsistent in your definition of "Bob user". Bob > as been someone we don't bother with little details like disk > partitioning, but he's expected to know how to choose between kde and > gnome?
Maybe not the same Bob Users...:-) We're dealing here with a quite informal population of people wanting to "easily" install Debian and indeed we're probably having hard times in figuring out exactly what they might expect. This is mostly why I basically adhere to the very simple scheme we currently have....but also think that we can probably find a way to make it a bit more granular....in the future. > > > So, branching it is probably the first thing to do (there used to be a > > "newtasksel" thing somewhere at some time, IIRC) so that "breaking" it > > has less consequences. > > As I told you in an earlier (I think private) mail, we cannot branch > tasksel and change tasks and expect the branch to be reflected in the > archive without some ftp-master involement. If you do this the naive way > you will end up destabalising sarge. OK, point taken. I probably missed the mail you mention, sorry for that. So, you bring here a very strong argument : we indeed cannot currently branch tasksel, so starting new developments on it is very unlikely as this would break sarge. Conclusion : we can only discuss around and around with no development possible ATM. Then we should focus on something else and learn how to live with tasksel as it is for sarge..... (and you'll probably tell me this is exactly what you were doing until we started to beat this dead horse again.....:-))) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
