History: Tiki Packages vs built-in

Starting in ((Tiki18)), there is a new option for Tiki dependencies: ((doc:Packages)). Given this new option, what are the criteria to pick one over the other?

There is a tiny overhead for site admins and developers to use Packages. But it's so tiny that it should not be factored in the choice.

!! Reason to use Packages
* To get around ((tw:license)) issues
* Use up a lot of disk space (like mPDF)
* Dependendies that have other dependencies (including apps or utilities that may not be in PHP)
** ((OCR)) (planned for ((Tiki19)))
** Media Alchemyst (FFmpeg, etc)
** CasperJS, which requires ((PhantomJS))
* Niche use cases
** ((doc:SAML)) and also because it requires Mcrypt, but this dependency will be removed in next major version of php-saml
* Dependency on something that is not commonly available on shared hosting

!! Reasons to have it built-in
* Small
* Appropriate ((tw:license))
* Commonly used
* Used by many other libs
* Works on all hosts (ex.: just PHP)