Christian Iseli wrote: > Hi folks, > > Here is this week's report. I tried to come up with some reasonable > criteria to filter a bit the missing packages from the comps.xml file. > That still leaves over 700 missing... so please have a look and add > them where you think it's appropriate. > > A rough guesstimate of what should go in comps.xml is found here > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/CompsXml > > I know I still need to clean that page... that'll come. (or someone > else can beat me to it... I won't hold grudges... :-) ) > > For the moment, I used those rules to filter the packages: > ignore a package named P-xxx if a package named P is in Core or Extras > ignore packages where the string "plugin" appears in their name > ignore packages with names starting with: > lib > compat- > font(s)- > gtk- > kmod- > xfce4- > ignore packages with names ending with: > -devel > lib(s0-9) > -python > -perl > -server(s) > -client(s) > -tool(s) > -contrib(s) > -doc(s) > -(x)emacs > -util(s) > -font(s) > > There are also some cases of non-existent packages listed in > comps.xml. I think they should be removed when we prepare the > branching of FC6... > I've been running through the list of packages I own which are listed in your status report as missing from comps. Many of them are valid (and have been added), but there are also quite a few false positives: * AllegroOGG (library) * Glide3 (library) * Hermes (library) * adime (library) * arc (cmdline tool) * bin2iso (cmdline tool) * coldet (library) * dumb (library) * glyph-keeper (library) * goffice (library) * lzo (library) * ode (library) * ogre (library) * soundtouch (library) How do we handle these, blacklist them? (Maybe hidden somewhere in the wiki so that you don't have to maintain the blacklist?) Regards, Hans -- fedora-extras-list mailing list fedora-extras-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-extras-list
