On 2010/11/8 Magnus Therning <[email protected]> wrote: > On 08/11/10 19:51, Xyne wrote: >> Magnus Therning wrote: >> >>>> I suggest adding them to a group named "haskell-platform" too. >>> >>> With or without having a haskell-platform package? >> >> Packages and groups should never have the same name. If you think a package >> by that name would make more sense then forget I mentioned using a group. > > I personally think a (meta-) package is better than a group. I've never > really understood groups. That is, I understand perfectly how they > work, but > I don't understand the reason for having them.
I see groups as a user-friendly manner of presenting, sorting, installing packages, while meta-packages are friendlier to developers and package managers (you can use a meta-package as dependency). I don't think we are going to have depends=(haskell-platform) anywhere, since all PKGBUILDs we have rely on the individual libraries. -- Rémy. _______________________________________________ arch-haskell mailing list [email protected] http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/arch-haskell
