I think they have to go into the update stream or there's no point.  As 
long as they're in the update stream, the base image is still huge and 
people writing code will still depend on methods, etc being there 
instead of depending on the package that contains it.

Not to mention, as Dnaiel pointed out, in some cases pulling stuff out 
of the image may require making architecture chages like the dynamic 
FileList stuff.

If we're pulling it out of 3.4a people aren't going to end up there from 
3.2 looking for bugfixes.  And presumably everyone on this list is aware 
that in 3.4 onwards we are  starting to pull stuff out of the image...?

Julian

Ned Konz wrote:

> On Thursday 14 November 2002 01:38 pm, danielv at netvision.net.il wrote:
>
> >3. After some testing, and sometime for the package maintainership
> >to move to SM, the removal script is made into an update.
>
>
> I think we need to separate these removals somehow from the update
> stream. Perhaps my earlier suggestion about having removal scripts
> register themselves separately so you could choose to remove specific
> packages.
>
> I don't want someone who's using (say) PWS to update for bug fixes and
> suddenly find themselves without functionality they needed...
>


-- 
julian at beta4.com
Beta4 Productions (http://www.beta4.com)