Le lundi 27 novembre 2006 à 15:33 -0500, Brian Pepple a écrit : > On Mon, 2006-11-27 at 13:24 -0500, Bill Nottingham wrote: > > We already have a 'package search' interface for finding packages - is > > listing 100 (or however many) python-* packages better than this? In > > what way? Are they not getting pulled in for dependencies when necessary? > > I'm in agreement with Bill on this. Pretty much all the python-* > packages should be pulled in as dependencies. Am I missing something > here? It's pretty much impossible to autodetect missing comps entries unless every package is systematically put in comps. No autochecking means low QA. Also if a group is too big it should be broken up in lighter finer-grained ones IMHO. Choosing the right group is much less work than writing the package description, and often more useful for users. -- Nicolas Mailhot
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Ceci est une partie de message =?ISO-8859-1?Q?num=E9riquement?= =?ISO-8859-1?Q?_sign=E9e?=
-- fedora-extras-list mailing list fedora-extras-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-extras-list
