Guidelines for creating subpackages?

Christopher Stone chris.stone at
Sat Dec 1 15:49:35 UTC 2007

On Dec 1, 2007 4:33 AM, Leszek Matok <Lam at> wrote:
> Dnia 2007-12-01, o godz. 13:11:41 Patrice Dumas <pertusus at> napisał(a):
> > A standard policy is not desirable in my opinion. More subpackages
> > may allow for better granularity, but the user has to install
> > and sometime know about more packages. There is also added
> > packaging complexity. So definitely the packager choice.
> There's also more metadata, so even slower yum (not that you can actually
> notice at this point), some people might even think it's a bad idea at the
> repository/distribution level.
> On the other hand, subpackages are the only way to escape the
> infamous "dependency hell" that's still scaring some people away from Fedora.

This is an *extremely* important topic.

Let's face it, if Fedora wants to have any hope of becoming a base
distribution for all other distributions, then all optional requires
will need to be split into sub-packages.

We must have as fine a granularity in our packages as possible.

There is no way in hell anyone is going to use Fedora packages when
they are forced to bring in dozens of unneeded and unwanted packages.

I cannot stress enough how important this is.

More information about the fedora-devel-list mailing list