On Tue, Jan 31, 2012 at 2:56 PM, Bill Nottingham <notting@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> That's an implementation detail. It's not a capability-driven >> description of which packages should actually be in the minimal package >> set, as was discussed earlier in the thread. > > Merely stating that if you're linking to what the minimal set of packages > will be, that's it. But to Adam's point, who defines what is in @core and what it can do? Could I decide tomorrow that the GNOME desktop is a core functionality of the distro and commit it to comps and so it is (I seriously hope someone would come shoot me if I *actually* did that :) )? I guess this goes to the point that no one "owns" comps groups, but I think someone should, and @core (and to a lesser extent @base) should be "special" to have some defined set of functionality. But I think this is getting *way* off topic for QA and should be a fesco discussion :) -- test mailing list test@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
