On Wed, Sep 26, 2018 at 12:36 PM Adam Williamson <adamwill@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Tue, 2018-09-25 at 08:17 +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote: > > > > Dne 24.9.2018 v 19:32 Adam Williamson napsal(a): > > > On Mon, 2018-09-24 at 12:21 +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote: > > > > Just FTR, some while ago, I proposed to drop comps entirely: > > > > > > > > https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/message/ISCIB67JKW7WBC74KA4DSCAP6AZOUY5G/ > > > That...doesn't seem like a very serious proposal at all, given that you > > > didn't suggest *in any way* how we would replace the critical functions > > > it's currently performing. Are you suggesting metapackages? > > > > Well I proposed "drop comps entirely (or at least trim them down > > significantly)". At least the second part is in line with your request I > > believe. > > > > And I am not speaking necessarily about "metapackages". But we should > > really start using Recommends more and especially Suggest is unused at > > all. E.g. in comps, there is "Ruby on Rails" group installing bunch of > > packages. There is no reason to not have these dependencies specified in > > rubygem-rails (which already exists and has its purpose no matter if > > there are comps or not) via Suggests for example. The only issue AFAIK > > is there is no real support for Suggests in DNF :/ > > How would this work in the identified use case of 'package managers > displaying groups of packages for browsing'? Would the package managers > have to somehow generate these views on the fly from Suggests? libsolv can generate special solvables when packages are tagged correctly, which could be exposed through the DNF API such that dnfdaemon can identify it as a "group" type and represent them specially. This is how patterns work in (open)SUSE with Zypper. But actually, I'd rather not go to that, because the composition groups based categorization is too weak and incomplete when it comes to sorting packages for people to browse (which is what dnfdragora does). This is why I'd advocate for the return of the RPM Group tag, because it's a useful way to categorize the entire collection of packages. But if we insist on comps-style grouping *only*, then we could do that with metapackages. We can also do it to some extent with AppStream data, but again, that's incomplete from the perspective of the distribution as a whole. It's not useful enough for a package manager view, though it's certainly good for an app-centric view. -- 真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth! _______________________________________________ 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
