On Sat, Sep 08, 2012 at 01:13:22AM +0100, Pierre-Malo wrote in <[email protected]>:
Hi all,

I'm writing about the current rpm group policy:
http://wiki.mageia.org/en/RPM_groups_policy

In this list, there are some groups that contain only a handful of
packages while some others are in the hundreds. It sometimes makes it
very hard to use rpmdrake (or other tools) to browse the packages. It is
not a bug per se, but rather an interface issue, particularly with
inexperienced users.

My interest lies in particular in the Development/Other group. It is
currently a mess, mixing up programming tools with libraries and
compilers for the non-major programming languages. Among them, there are
now 300 packages for OCaml-related packages. I propose we create a
Development/OCaml group for them.
I also noticed that despite our policy not having a Development/Tools
rpm group, some packages started using it (I guess because Fedora and
Suse have a Development/Tools group). I think this is a good idea and we
could move there various tools currently in Development/Other like cvs,
subversion (and all vcs), valgrind, make, autoconf, etc.

If you agree, I will amend our
http://wiki.mageia.org/en/RPM_groups_policy
with these two changes
and get in touch with the appropriate packagers/maintainers to do the
group change (which is a trivial spec change).

Hi Malo,

I am in agreement with your proposal above, but I think the RPM groups policy need a wider overhaul. For examples, I miss categories for scheduling and productivity, as well as a category for personal finances, etc.

As these changes also mean an update to our rpmlint package, I think it is best if someone drafts up a list of the needed changes and presents that in an upcoming dev team meeting for sanctioning.

Remmy

Attachment: pgp1OMINK2KRn.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply via email to