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

Nicolas Mailhot nicolas.mailhot at
Tue Sep 23 07:00:20 UTC 2008

Le lundi 22 septembre 2008 à 18:52 -0400, Matthias Clasen a écrit :
> On Mon, 2008-09-22 at 15:21 -0700, Jesse Keating wrote:
> > On Mon, 2008-09-22 at 21:43 +0100, Richard Hughes wrote:

> > > And just correcting you: this wasn't _my_ decision, this was the result
> > > of working with lots of other distros. Sarcasm doesn't help anybody.
> > 
> > Neither does letting other distributions make decisions about ours.
> Thanks Jesse, for making it clear that you are more interested in
> confrontation than a constructive discussion impossible. 

Constructive discussion needs to be 2 way. I had to write down the PK
position on this for people on fedora-devel to learn what decisions were
being made for them. And the decisions touched packaging which is
fedora-devel main subject. (unfortunately the desktop team mislike for
the common distro communication channel is not new).

I sure hope the "other distro representatives" we've read so much on
were more representative than the Fedora ones.

> People who are interested in improving PackageKit should probably take
> the discussion to the packagekit list (packagekit at

But we're not interested in improving PK. We're interested in improving
Fedora. If PK intends to focus on a non-Fedora user, we're not
interested in PK are we?

Nicolas Mailhot
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: Ceci est une partie de message num?riquement sign?e
URL: <>

More information about the fedora-devel-list mailing list