On 11/27/06, Bill Nottingham <notting@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Christopher Stone (chris.stone@xxxxxxxxx) said: > If you ask what good it provides, then I have to ask what harm would > it cause? That's not how good engineering is done, generally - it's based on 'Why?', not 'Why not?' Any bit of new code: 1) can add bugs 2) adds a maintenance load 3) adds complexity The idea is to figure out the scenarios and personas you're trying to design for, and then figure out how to meet those needs. How does a checkbox list of 589 packages (roughly the number of perl-* packages) make someone's life easier? Is this better done via searching for 'perl' in the package search interface, for example?
I would say no. Take for example python packages. Some are called python-* some are called py* some are called Py* some are called *py, etc.
Playing devil's advocate, if you go this way, wouldn't the better way be to automatically tag packages that install files in /usr/lib/python-2.4/site-packages as 'python modules', and generate the comps file from a database?
Yea, if you can autogenerate comps files that would be great! -- fedora-extras-list mailing list fedora-extras-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-extras-list
