How important is comps.xml to us these days? Which packages should be in comps.xml and which not?

[Thorsten Leemhuis]

On 20.09.2008 21:13, Ville Skyttä wrote:
> On Saturday 20 September 2008, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
> 
>>> If you maintain an application which makes sense for a user to select
>>> during installation, [...] make sure that your package is listed in a
>>> reasonable group in the comps-fn.xml.in files.
>> I consider the "during installation" part not much helpful
> Not sure if you're referring to the addition of those two words, but I added 
> them today -

I don't have a any problems with the addition of those two words (but 
I'm not sure if they really improve the situation); the change OTOH was 
one more reason for me to actually write the mail that started this 
thread ;-)

> if I'm missing something and they make the document less 
> correct, the change should be reverted.

No pressing need to; what we afaics need is this

1. take a closer look at how the data from comps.xml is used in anaconda 
and PackageKit or other software
2. based on those information create more clear guidelines (or even a 
policy) what packages should be in comps (and where and how)
3. implement that guideline/policy; that normally will be a job that is 
best done by the package maintainers; but I suppose more than just a few 
will likely ignore that work, thus depending on how important comps.xml 
is (which depends on "1") someone maybe should sit down and add all 
those that are not in yet but should;

 > [...]

CU
knurd