On 11/27/06, Bill Nottingham <notting@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Christopher Stone (chris.stone@xxxxxxxxx) said: > >Why, out of curiosity? In what cases are these something that a user > >wants to explicitly wade through 100 listings for? > > I do not understand this question? Is it somehow better to wade > through 1000s of packages to find something instead? Please rephrase > your question to be more specific. 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? Basically, what's the use case for when a user would want to scroll through all of python-* or perl-* looking for a package?
When the user is a developer, and that developer want to see what python/perl modules are available to her. If you ask what good it provides, then I have to ask what harm would it cause? If there was a "Perl Develoment" group added to the Development comps category how would that make things more difficult for users? A user isn't going to be looking in the development part of comps unless she is a developer, or clicked there by accident. If it makes everyone happy, I can not add a perl or python development group, but I dont see any harm in doing so. -- fedora-extras-list mailing list fedora-extras-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-extras-list
