On 14. 3. 2013 at 04:58:51, Dan Mashal wrote: > On Thu, Mar 14, 2013 at 4:56 AM, Jan Zelený <jzeleny@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On 14. 3. 2013 at 04:48:33, Dan Mashal wrote: > >> On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 1:46 AM, Jan Zelený <jzeleny@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> > Hi guys, > >> > as per [1], 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 groups > >> > 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 discuss > >> > 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 Workstation" > >> > > >> > [1] > >> > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_use_and_edit_comps.xml_for_packag > >> > e_g > >> > roups > >> > > >> > Thanks > >> > Jan > >> > -- > >> > devel mailing list > >> > devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > >> > 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. > > > > Dan, > > 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. > > > > Thanks > > Jan > > 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. Thanks Jan -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
