On Sunday 07 September 2008, Axel Thimm wrote: > On Sat, Sep 06, 2008 at 02:03:25PM -0400, Tom spot Callaway wrote: > > On Sat, 2008-09-06 at 18:24 +0100, Tim Jackson wrote: > > > Just a thought: perhaps the Packaging Guidelines should have a comment > > > about formulating the "Group" tag in spec files? If nothing else they > > > could tell you to go and read /usr/share/doc/rpm-*/GROUPS, but a bit of > > > advice would probably be welcome there, especially for new > > > contributors. > > > > Hmm, I know that we decided that we were not concerned with what went > > into the Group tag, but I don't see this reflected in the guidelines > > anywhere. > > We decided to ignore Grup tag --- literally :) > > How about just calling Group tag deprecated and to mention that > upcoming rpm (>=F10) won't even require one. My .02€: Even though it would be (is?) deprecated, it's not quite dead yet: it's still mandatory in specfiles in current GA distro versions, it's still displayed by "rpm -qi", prominently there in repoview and most likely there's a bunch of other apps that use it for more or less important features to them (e.g. the last time I checked: synaptic), and it is required by LSB. And it'll take a long long time until making it optional in F-10 will trickle down to other actively supported distro versions (think EL). So IMHO it would be good to have *some* guidelines for its usage that encourage consistency. I don't personally care exactly what that consistency means, be it a list of "valid" values or simply "Unspecified" as the only allowed value. rpmlint currently looks at /usr/share/doc/rpm-*/GROUPS and whines if the Group is not listed in it, some more info and thoughts at https://bugzilla.redhat.com/458460 -- Fedora-packaging mailing list Fedora-packaging@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-packaging
