On Thu, 2009-08-13 at 14:38 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote: > On Thu, 2009-08-13 at 12:53 -0700, Bryan O'Sullivan wrote: > > I've been working recently on bringing Fedora up to snuff as a > > platform to build Haskell software on: > > > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/SIGs/Haskell#Haskell_Platform_support > > > > In my ideal world, it would be possible to install all of the > > necessities for decent Haskell development via a single short command > > line. I can see two ways to do this: > > * Create a "haskell-devel" (or something) package that simply > > depends on all of the Haskell Platform's component packages. > > This would have the nice property of being versioned, just as > > the Haskell Platform itself is. > > * Create a "Haskell Development" group in comps. This is unknown > > territory to me: I don't know if it's a good idea, how it > > would work, how I'd edit it to add new dependencies when the > > Haskell Platform gets updates, or ... well, anything. > > What's the collective wisdom about the best approach for doing this? > > I wondered about this too when I joined, and several people told me > metapackages are generally discouraged in favour of package groups. I > don't know the rationale behind that decision, but that's what I was > told. I prefer comps groups. Here are the benefits of each approach as I see it: Comps Groups * visible through anaconda * configurable between products * allows for mandatory/default/optional/conditional packages * "cleaner" - i.e. comps groups were meant for this purpose whereas metapackages are more of a kludge Metapackages * allow for versioned package listings Cheers -- Dennis p.s. If you decide to create a metapackage, don't name it *-devel. Packages with those names are assumed to contain development libraries and are automatically marked as multilib. -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
