On 09/21/2018 06:14 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: ...snip... > The old gnome-packagekit, IIRC, also parsed groups and showed you all > this stuff. > > But...we don't do that any more. anaconda does not expose 'optional' > packages in any way any more (you can only pick environment groups and > their supplementary package groups in anaconda, now). GNOME Software > doesn't either. There's one other place they are used (although perhaps not much): dnf group install --with-optional groupname will install the group and all the optional stuff. I have no idea if many people use that... > So do we really need these acres of 'optional' packages in comps? I > mean, there are 2519 of them in comps-f30.xml.in. That's a lot. I > suspect no-one's looked whether most of them make any sense for years. > There are entire groups that are *nothing but optional packages*, > making them almost entirely useless. > > So, OK, I think there are probably apps out there that still expose > this info. I suspect dnfdragora does, for instance. But is the minor > benefit of having these lists of 'hey maybe you'd like this thing' in > minor package managers really worth the way they turn comps into even > more of a gigantic crufty ball-of-wax than it would otherwise be? > > Is anyone really super-attached to this kinda stuff? I'm not. ;) I think we have moved on to where people look for an install apps or tools for their specific need, rather than installing everything in that area. kevin
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
