Why samba-client not installed by default?

[drago01]

On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 8:05 PM, Reindl Harald <h.reindl at thelounge.net> wrote:
>
>
> Am 19.12.2012 17:58, schrieb drago01:
>> On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 3:37 PM, Reindl Harald <h.reindl at thelounge.net> wrote:
>>> Am 19.12.2012 15:29, schrieb Ozan Çağlayan:
>>>> On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 4:08 PM, Reindl Harald <h.reindl at thelounge.net> wrote:
>>>>> because most people the days are using network-printers
>>>>> even the cheap HP printers having WLAN/LAN and working without
>>>>> any windows crap
>>>>
>>>> Agree but it doesn't change the fact that there are still plenty of
>>>> printers shared through Windows.
>>>
>>> maybe, but you have to read manuals all the time and can not
>>> expect to have anything working out-of-the-box, there are
>>> even people not owning a printer at all
>>
>> I disagree you should not have to read manuals all the time to do
>> basic tasks like printing.
>
> printing OVER SAMBA is NOT a basic task
> it is not common for the normal enduser

It is.

> it may be common in company networks
> but there should nobody have to add a printer by himself
>
>> @Ozan: File a bug and ask for the dep to be added
>
> and i would file a bug if something pulls samba-client as
> dependency - there are still WAY too much useless dependencies
> like colord and i refuse to accept more of them!

We shouldn't make the user experience worse just because you don't
approve additional dependencies.
And no there are not useless otherwise there wouldn't be there in the
first place.