[arch-general] gstreamer0.10-good-plugins need a whole load of GNOME stuff?

[Ananda Samaddar]

On Tue, 20 Apr 2010 21:26:33 -0500
"David C. Rankin" <drankinatty at suddenlinkmail.com> wrote:
> 
> 	It still amazes me how people will take the position that all
> associated with Gnome must be 'crap'. No don't get me wrong, I have
> no arguments with your basic complaint that unnecessary dependencies
> need not be included with the gstreamer packages. In fact, I agree.
> 
> 	However, that notwithstanding, the general premise asserted
> in the comment "GNOME crap" is just flat wrong. Now I was a KDE guy,
> did a lot of beta work with KDE4 and also enjoy enlightenment, the
> 'boxtops', windowmaker and recently Gnome. From first-hand
> experience, I can tell you gnome is not crap. It is a solid desktop
> built on the metacity wm that does a great many things right and a
> handful of things I would do differently if I wrote desktops and
> wm's, but on balance is an excellent desktop.
> 
> 	Not to mention, it is just down right gorgeous:
> 
> (152k)
> http://www.3111skyline.com/dl/img/ss/gnome/BlueNightII.scaled.jpg
> 
> 	Oh well, at least the gstreamer packages stripped of
> unnecessary dependencies will be a great addition to AUR. Thank you
> for that. But no need to deride a desktop just because whoever
> packaged it last included a few unneeded dependencies :p
> 
> 

Yes it was an unfortunate choice of words.  I don't think GNOME is crap,
I'm just not enamoured with the direction it seems to be headed in,
i.e. GNOME Shell.  I can do without shiny stuff like that.  Previous to
my switching to XFCE I was a GNOME user for a very long time.  I reckon
GNOME 3.0 will be just as much of a PR nightmare as KDE4 was and
continues to be.

It frustrates me that core technologies can depend on a long
list of dependencies for another desktop environment.  Try installing
gstreamer0.10-plugins-good if you're not running GNOME and you'll see
what I mean.

Ananda