On Thu, May 31, 2001 at 08:50:31PM +0200, Stephan Kulow wrote:
> On Thursday, 31. May 2001 16:55, Michael Matz wrote:
> > You keep repeating that argument, but fail to see, that there is no
> > Solaris distro. Or OSF, HP-UX, IRIX, BSD, whatnot.  People who don't
> > have hassle with X shouldn't recommend to remove X just because they
> > don't need it.  You don't need kdesupport, good.  Don't install it.

Okay, point taken.

> I think we agreed that kdesupport stays the way it's now, we prepare an
> extra mimelib tar ball and even add more stuff to it, but make explicit
> that kdesupport is just there for convenience.

Yes. I will update the configure.in.bot messages to make this more clear and
add the same message to kdesupport/README and kdesupport/README.packagers
(which urges packagers not use package kdesupport)

> But someone should maintain it - if I have to maintain it, my last act as 
> maintainer will be cvs remove.

Maintainance responsibility lies with the developers who create the
dependencies. If your application needs libXXX, put it in kdesupport and
maintain it.

Rob
-- 
Rob Kaper     | 'What? In riddles?' said Gandalf. 'No! For I was talking
cap@capsi.com | aloud to myself. A habit of the old: they choose the wisest
www.capsi.com | person present to speak to; the long explanations needed by
              | the young are wearying.' - "Lord of the Rings", JRR Tolkien