Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

feat: include rar from negativo17 #648

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from
Closed

Conversation

qoijjj
Copy link
Contributor

@qoijjj qoijjj commented Oct 9, 2024

Sadly, rar from brew is only available via cask and so doesn't work on linux: https://formulae.brew.sh/cask/rar

Thankfully, negativo17 provides this package in the multimedia repo, which was just added. The rar package is less than half a megabyte, so it shouldn't meaningfully impact image sizes.

@qoijjj qoijjj requested a review from castrojo as a code owner October 9, 2024 19:06
@dosubot dosubot bot added size:XS This PR changes 0-9 lines, ignoring generated files. enhancement New feature or request labels Oct 9, 2024
@bsherman
Copy link
Contributor

bsherman commented Oct 9, 2024

I agree with your assertions, but I'm not clear on where this fits in the scope of main images:

From https://universal-blue.org/mission.html ...

We will be brutal about making things out of scope.

😁

@qoijjj
Copy link
Contributor Author

qoijjj commented Oct 9, 2024

@bsherman it is explicitly in scope, moreso than many of the packages already included (like tmux):

Non-free codecs aka. “a bunch of that RPMFusion stuff”.

This is adding support for a proprietary file format. It is expressly in scope.

If we suddenly want to make this project adhere more closely to the scope, rar should be added and tmux and other packages would need to be removed.

@bsherman
Copy link
Contributor

bsherman commented Oct 9, 2024

Non-free codecs aka. “a bunch of that RPMFusion stuff”.

This is adding support for a proprietary file format. It is expressly in scope.

This is a reasonable view of the scope. Thank you, I want to have that clear for anything we consider adding to main.

If we suddenly want to make this project adhere more closely to the scope, rar should be added and tmux and other packages would need to be removed.

It has been argued several times that the package list should either be made "more compliant with scope" else we should be more permissive about adding packages because some existing package doesn't fit well with scope.

My position has been consistent, nothing "sudden" about it:

  • existing packages have grandfathered status even if they don't fit clearly in scope
  • existing packages are always subject to removal over time if deemed appropriate
  • new package requests will always be weighed against scope

We will not be doing a full correction of existing image packages to comply with one's perspective of appropriate scope.
However, we HAVE pruned things out of the package list as seems reasonable... hence being "brutal about making things out of scope."

@bsherman bsherman requested a review from a team October 9, 2024 19:37
@qoijjj
Copy link
Contributor Author

qoijjj commented Oct 9, 2024

@bsherman makes sense, yeah I was just using it as an example. I don't really care about tmux being present.

@castrojo castrojo closed this Oct 9, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancement New feature or request size:XS This PR changes 0-9 lines, ignoring generated files.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants