On Tue, 08 Mar 2005 21:41:54 -0500, Havoc Pennington <hp@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > My point was to only have the stuff that's in a comps group in Core at > all (and then the debate about what's in Core can be more about which > comps group, e.g. "does Java Development go in Core" rather than "does > package XYZ go in Core") > > Of course there can be flames about which packages are in the comps > groups... but that seems somewhat more manageable than an undefined > Core/Extras line. +1 But I warn you the discussion about how to define comps groupings is going to get messy. Comps has to be extended into extras... organizing extras into groupings is going to be a dentist visit sort of fun. You might be able to pigeon hole Core into sane, intutive functionality groups that ui experts will love to expose to Core users, but what ever group naming scheme works for Core is going to break down a bit in the larger Extras space. Do you really want to expose seperate groupings like gnome games, java games, kde games as comps groupings in whatever ui a user sees? -jef
