Hi folks, why does fedora-release require fedora-release-notes? There are different aims to adjust package dependencies for security or minimal installation reasons. For example: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/SIGs/Server I'm wondering if we can avoid fedora-release-notes in minimal installation. fedora-release-notes ~ 5MB

On Wed, 2009-01-28 at 11:24 -0500, Bill Nottingham wrote: > Peter Vrabec (pvrabec(a)redhat.com) said: > >> Hi folks, >> >> why does fedora-release require fedora-release-notes? There are different aims >> to adjust package dependencies for security or minimal installation reasons. >> For example: >> >> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/SIGs/Server >> >> I'm wondering if we can avoid fedora-release-notes in minimal installation. >> >> fedora-release-notes ~ 5MB >> > Upgrades from prior releases where the release notes were in fedora-release, > IIRC. There may be other reasons. > > Bill > > The spec has this comment: # We require release notes to make sure that they don't get dropped during # upgrades, and just because we always want the release notes available # instead of explicitly asked for I do believe this rational came from Jeremy Katz when I took over fedora-release and we split out the release notes from that package. I would certainly entertain revisiting this issue.

On Wed, 2009-01-28 at 19:02 +0100, Daniel Mach wrote: > > Jesse, is there any important data in this package which needs to be > shipped in Fedora at any cost? > I can imagine some legal or licensing information about Fedora. I don't believe so.

On Wed, 2009-01-28 at 13:50 -0500, Paul W. Frields wrote: > On Wed, Jan 28, 2009 at 10:03:06AM -0800, Jesse Keating wrote: > > On Wed, 2009-01-28 at 19:02 +0100, Daniel Mach wrote: > > > > > > Jesse, is there any important data in this package which needs to be > > > shipped in Fedora at any cost? > > > I can imagine some legal or licensing information about Fedora. > > > > I don't believe so. > > The arguable value of the "About Fedora" item -- which as some Desktop > team members have noted, probably needs to be revamped -- is certainly > not enough to keep it. It would be prudent and probably good manners > to alert the Docs team about contemplating dropping this, too. Well, we would make it a default install item via groupings, but perhaps not /forced/ install, so that one could remove it/opt out of installing it should they wish.

thnx. folks, I have filed two bugs: 1. don't require fedora-release-notes in fedora-release https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=483018 2. install fedora-release-notes vie "base" group https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=483019

thnx. folks, I have filed two bugs: 1. don't require fedora-release-notes in fedora-release https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=483018 2. install fedora-release-notes vie "base" group https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=483019 On Wednesday 28 January 2009 11:24:04 pm Paul W. Frields wrote: > On Wed, Jan 28, 2009 at 11:05:41AM -0800, Jesse Keating wrote: > > On Wed, 2009-01-28 at 13:50 -0500, Paul W. Frields wrote: > > > On Wed, Jan 28, 2009 at 10:03:06AM -0800, Jesse Keating wrote: > > > > On Wed, 2009-01-28 at 19:02 +0100, Daniel Mach wrote: > > > > > Jesse, is there any important data in this package which needs to > > > > > be shipped in Fedora at any cost? > > > > > I can imagine some legal or licensing information about Fedora. > > > > > > > > I don't believe so. > > > > > > The arguable value of the "About Fedora" item -- which as some > > > Desktop team members have noted, probably needs to be revamped -- is > > > certainly not enough to keep it. It would be prudent and probably > > > good manners to alert the Docs team about contemplating dropping > > > this, too. > > > > Well, we would make it a default install item via groupings, but > > perhaps not /forced/ install, so that one could remove it/opt out of > > installing it should they wish. > > Thanks for clarifying this.

>>>> "JK" == Jesse Keating <jkeating(a)redhat.com&gt; writes:

>>>> "JS" == Jeff Spaleta <jspaleta(a)gmail.com&gt; writes:

The spec has this comment: # We require release notes to make sure that they don't get dropped during # upgrades, and just because we always want the release notes available # instead of explicitly asked for I do believe this rational came from Jeremy Katz when I took over fedora-release and we split out the release notes from that package. I would certainly entertain revisiting this issue.

On Wednesday 28 January 2009, Peter Vrabec wrote: > fedora-release-notes ~ 5MB By the way, at least as of F-9, there's a lot of different language files included in this package, none of which are marked with %lang, so %_install_langs doesn't help with the installed size. I wonder if that's on purpose?

On Wed, Jan 28, 2009 at 10:14:52AM -0800, Jesse Keating wrote: > On Wed, 2009-01-28 at 20:12 +0200, Ville Skyttä wrote: > > On Wednesday 28 January 2009, Peter Vrabec wrote: > > > fedora-release-notes ~ 5MB > > > > By the way, at least as of F-9, there's a lot of different language > > files included in this package, none of which are marked with %lang, so > > %_install_langs doesn't help with the installed size. I wonder if > > that's on purpose? > > Probably not on purpose. Paul Frields owns the package, shoot a patch > his way? Yeah, definitely not on purpose. Patch/bug filing appreciated.