[aur-general] Should "base" packages be listed as dependencies?

[Ralf Mardorf]

On Wed, 22 Mar 2017 22:31:34 -0400, Eli Schwartz via aur-general wrote:
>nano (vi is the standard, and *I* don't even want to include that
>because vim)

For modern Linux distros nano has become a standard as well. What's bad
with providing it by base? Linux isn't UNIX from the 70s. I'm not using
reiser, but what is so problematic with including reiserfsprogs? It at
least was a Linux FS preferred as default FS for e.g. Suse a few
years back? It's idiotic to discuss such trivialities. Some prefer it
more old school others less old school. You are more old school but
that's not enough, you even want to discuss what belongs to the old
school.

Regards,
Ralf