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

[Arthur Pemberton]

On Mon, Sep 22, 2008 at 3:43 PM, Richard Hughes <hughsient at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 2008-09-22 at 11:22 -0700, Jesse Keating wrote:
>> So your solution is to invent something else entirely, rather than
>> helping Fedora clean up its groupings definitions?  Really?  Nice.
>
> No. PK groups are made up _from_ the comps groups. There are just an
> order of magnitude less options, and it's a flat list rather than a
> tree. Comps supports optional, mandatory, suggested and the sort of
> power user stuff that I just don't want to support in PackageKit.


You should have said this earlier. This puts this discussion in the
hands of UI and design specialists, as opposed to developers. Which
may mean that Fedora is the wrong place to do most of this work.
Because this suggests that this tool will be useless to me. I tried to
use packagekit when I first installed it. I was taking some notes to
file bugs, but these will likely not be of interest as they are aimed
more at users like myself.

There is no reason why an abstracted GUI should be less easy to use than yum.


-- 
Fedora 9 : sulphur is good for the skin
( www.pembo13.com )