On 14. 3. 2013 at 04:58:51, Dan Mashal wrote:
On Thu, Mar 14, 2013 at 4:56 AM, Jan Zelený
> On 14. 3. 2013 at 04:48:33, Dan Mashal wrote:
>> On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 1:46 AM, Jan Zelený <jzeleny(a)redhat.com> wrote:
>> > Hi guys,
>> > as per , I'd like to propose some patches for F19 comps. These
>> > patches
>> > are splitting group called Development Tools into several smaller
>> > groups.
>> > The purpose of this email is to find out if there is something
>> > fundamentally wrong with the change (except for the fact that it is
>> > change).
>> > These are key points about the patch set:
>> > 1. There should be only small visible impact to users. Currently the
>> > only
>> > tool that is commonly using comps is anaconda and that uses the
>> > "Developer workstation" environment. This group will contain all
>> > that were created by the split to ensure maximal similarity to the old
>> > state of things.
>> > 2. All in all, the Development Tools group needed a huge cleanup, as it
>> > contained a lot of different tools and/or devel packages but many times
>> > these were only fractions of development environments necessary for the
>> > particular purpose. These tools are mostly still avaiable in other
>> > groups, like C development, Electronic Lab, ...
>> > 3. The current idea for Developer Tools group is to contain just tools
>> > that
>> > are common/usable for development of most programming languages
>> > 4. This should bring only the "big picture change". No need to
>> > what
>> > particular packages should be in which group. That can be tuned any
>> > time
>> > later.
>> > 5. More groups targeted at specific areas should be created and/or
>> > reviewed
>> > soon-ish. Among them:
>> > Perl Development
>> > Python Development
>> > Ruby Development
>> > feel free to suggest more development-related areas that you would like
>> > to
>> > improve.
>> > The goal of this effort is to start a process which would lead to more
>> > usable comps, so users will be able (and more importantly encouraged)
>> > to
>> > simply use for example yum to install these environments. By that time,
>> > these environments should be cleaned up, in case user wants to install
>> > just specific type of devel env, not the entire "Developer
>> > 
>> > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_use_and_edit_comps.xml_for_packag
>> > e_g
>> > roups
>> > Thanks
>> > Jan
>> > --
>> > devel mailing list
>> > devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
>> > https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
>> Please undo this change immediately and wait more than 2 days before
>> you split such a massive group of important packages.
> thanks for your input. Did it break something for you? As I indicated
> above, the split itself should have no effect for vast majority of users.
> The only thing that might have some impact is the cleanup of packages.
> However that impact will not be major, as many of these packages are in
> different developer- focused groups anyway.
I haven't been able to find out yet because my rawhide machine is
broken but, intltool definitely needs to stay there.
Well, feel free to re-add it if you think that it is common tool that
developers regularly use. I don't share that thought but I certainly welcome
your input and I won't be angry at all if you put it back there.
We already have too many groups.
I see your point. Yet, at the same time, the bigger problem I observe is that
we have groups that either have way too broad scope or have misc optional
packages that are borderline non-qualified to be in those groups. Such groups
partially loose their purpose to make things more structured and lucid.