http://fedoraproject.org/extras/4/i386/repodata/

[Jeff Spaleta]

On 7/15/05, Jeremy Katz <katzj at redhat.com> wrote:
> So I'm not against going down that path, but at the same time, I think
> it does make sense to think about it from a user standpoint and try to
> come up with something that works better.


Is this a "something better" in terms of how a comps.xml is constructed?
Or is this "something better" in terms of how the nesting in comps is exposed?

If the nesting in comps that Chris outlined is fine and its just a
matter of making the tools sane, then we have a usable path forward
for Eric to do his trove-like sub-categorization while avoiding the
big flat list of 200+ group definitions.

-jef