Hello! 2010/4/10 Nicolas Mailhot <nicolas.mailhot@xxxxxxxxxxx>: > So you are proposing a metapackage. Fedora has historically frowned at > metapackages, we prefer to create comps groups to bundle multiple > packages together. Sorry, but this looks like purely non-technical argument for me (I mean using verbs like "prefer", "frown" and so on). I, for example, prefer meta-package, Fedora Haskellers prefer metapackage (haskell-platform) too. My scheme introduces zero maintenance efforts for those who are not interested in using modularized erlang package, while your one (with existing for a while compatible package) will definitely cause issues and complaints. > The one problem a comps group won't solve is upgrade paths, but that can > be handled by a temporary metapackage In fact this raises more issues than solutions, so I still believe that my proposed scheme is better than scheme with comps groups.. -- With best regards, Peter Lemenkov. -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
