On Thu, Sep 27, 2018 at 11:09 AM Stephen Gallagher wrote:
>
> On Wed, Sep 26, 2018 at 9:52 AM Matthew Miller
> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Sep 25, 2018 at 08:17:18AM +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote:
> > > rubygem-rails (which already exists and has its purpose no matter if
> > > there are comps or not) via
On Tue, Sep 25, 2018 at 10:11 PM Kevin Kofler wrote:
>
> Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> > That used to be true, but with Recommends these days, it's considerably
> > less so.
>
> Not really, because of:
> https://github.com/openSUSE/libsolv/issues/168
> (which libsolv upstream sadly does not consider
Dne 26.9.2018 v 18:35 Adam Williamson napsal(a):
> On Tue, 2018-09-25 at 08:17 +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote:
>> Dne 24.9.2018 v 19:32 Adam Williamson napsal(a):
>>> On Mon, 2018-09-24 at 12:21 +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote:
Just FTR, some while ago, I proposed to drop comps entirely:
On Mon, 2018-09-24 at 11:16 -0400, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 24, 2018 at 11:15 AM Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> > Metapackages have other issues too. They make it difficult to consume
> > part of a group. You either have to have everything or nothing. With
> > comps groups you can install a
On Wed, Sep 26, 2018 at 9:52 AM Matthew Miller wrote:
>
> On Tue, Sep 25, 2018 at 08:17:18AM +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote:
> > rubygem-rails (which already exists and has its purpose no matter if
> > there are comps or not) via Suggests for example. The only issue AFAIK
> > is there is no real
On Mon, 2018-09-24 at 16:28 -0400, Matthew Miller wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 23, 2018 at 06:05:16AM +0100, Peter Robinson wrote:
> > Some of the group stuff is also used during the compose and if things
> > aren't in groups specified but needed by say a kickstart the packages
> > won't be in certain
On Wed, Sep 26, 2018 at 12:36 PM Adam Williamson
wrote:
>
> On Tue, 2018-09-25 at 08:17 +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote:
> >
> > Dne 24.9.2018 v 19:32 Adam Williamson napsal(a):
> > > On Mon, 2018-09-24 at 12:21 +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote:
> > > > Just FTR, some while ago, I proposed to drop comps
On Tue, 2018-09-25 at 08:17 +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote:
>
> Dne 24.9.2018 v 19:32 Adam Williamson napsal(a):
> > On Mon, 2018-09-24 at 12:21 +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote:
> > > Just FTR, some while ago, I proposed to drop comps entirely:
> > >
> > >
Dne 26.9.2018 v 15:51 Matthew Miller napsal(a):
> On Tue, Sep 25, 2018 at 08:17:18AM +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote:
>> rubygem-rails (which already exists and has its purpose no matter if
>> there are comps or not) via Suggests for example. The only issue AFAIK
>> is there is no real support for
On Tue, Sep 25, 2018 at 08:17:18AM +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote:
> rubygem-rails (which already exists and has its purpose no matter if
> there are comps or not) via Suggests for example. The only issue AFAIK
> is there is no real support for Suggests in DNF :/
What would that look like? An
Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> That used to be true, but with Recommends these days, it's considerably
> less so.
Not really, because of:
https://github.com/openSUSE/libsolv/issues/168
(which libsolv upstream sadly does not consider a bug).
Kevin Kofler
Dne 24.9.2018 v 19:32 Adam Williamson napsal(a):
> On Mon, 2018-09-24 at 12:21 +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote:
>> Just FTR, some while ago, I proposed to drop comps entirely:
>>
>> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/ISCIB67JKW7WBC74KA4DSCAP6AZOUY5G/
>
Matthew Miller (mat...@fedoraproject.org) said:
> On Sun, Sep 23, 2018 at 06:05:16AM +0100, Peter Robinson wrote:
> > Some of the group stuff is also used during the compose and if things
> > aren't in groups specified but needed by say a kickstart the packages
> > won't be in certain places and
On Sun, Sep 23, 2018 at 06:05:16AM +0100, Peter Robinson wrote:
> Some of the group stuff is also used during the compose and if things
> aren't in groups specified but needed by say a kickstart the packages
> won't be in certain places and will break things. I did this by
> accident when adding
On Mon, 2018-09-24 at 08:47 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> If we want to fix that we'd need to somehow run the comps script on all
> changes in dist-git and block those changes on introducing comps
> problems, which seems like a rather more difficult problem.
Well...thinking about it a bit more,
On Mon, 2018-09-24 at 12:21 +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote:
> Just FTR, some while ago, I proposed to drop comps entirely:
>
> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/ISCIB67JKW7WBC74KA4DSCAP6AZOUY5G/
That...doesn't seem like a very serious proposal at all,
On Mon, 2018-09-24 at 08:26 +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 23, 2018 at 10:41:31AM +0200, Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
> > Le samedi 22 septembre 2018 à 11:38 -0700, Adam Williamson a écrit :
> > > But at the same time I think Matt's right that comps -at least as it's
> > >
On Mon, Sep 24, 2018 at 11:15 AM Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> Metapackages have other issues too. They make it difficult to consume
> part of a group. You either have to have everything or nothing. With
> comps groups you can install a group, remove some packages you don't
> want and still get updates to
On 09/23/2018 10:14 PM, Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
> Le lundi 24 septembre 2018 à 00:57 +0200, Kevin Kofler a écrit :
>>
>> Another issue if you want to use metapackages for categorization is
>> that UIs
>> such as Dnfdragora, or whatever tool converts the metapackages to a
>> representation those
Just FTR, some while ago, I proposed to drop comps entirely:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/ISCIB67JKW7WBC74KA4DSCAP6AZOUY5G/
Vít
Dne 22.9.2018 v 03:14 Adam Williamson napsal(a):
> Hi folks!
>
> I am currently working on finding and
On Sun, Sep 23, 2018 at 10:41:31AM +0200, Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
> Le samedi 22 septembre 2018 à 11:38 -0700, Adam Williamson a écrit :
> >
> > But at the same time I think Matt's right that comps -at least as it's
> > currently set up - is kind of a really *bad* way of doing this, and
> > that
Le lundi 24 septembre 2018 à 00:57 +0200, Kevin Kofler a écrit :
>
> Another issue if you want to use metapackages for categorization is
> that UIs
> such as Dnfdragora, or whatever tool converts the metapackages to a
> representation those UIs will consume, would have to be told what
>
On Mon, 2018-09-24 at 00:57 +0200, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Neal Gompa wrote:
> > This is where I think that transforming comps into metapackages would
> > probably solve the remaining issues we have with the current workflow.
>
> I think metapackages could work for the distro composes, where ACL
>
Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote:
> Cons:
> - it's a free-form input field, so packager could add anything and
> everything including things we do not care about.
> -> So maybe we need a list of categories we care about somewhere and we
> only integrate packages having one or more of these
Neal Gompa wrote:
> This is where I think that transforming comps into metapackages would
> probably solve the remaining issues we have with the current workflow.
I think metapackages could work for the distro composes, where ACL
enforcement is wanted (so we would remove @group usage from
Small correction:
I wrote:
> part of the review process, and fedora-review can automatically print an
> error for missing Group tags (just as there is currently one if Group is
> missing).
I meant "just as there is currently one if Group is present".
Kevin Kofler
On Sat, Sep 22, 2018 at 12:26:31PM -0400, Matthew Miller wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 22, 2018 at 01:07:27PM +0200, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> > So I see only 2 alternatives:
> > a) keep comps as it is now, including optional packages, OR
> > b) undeprecate the RPM Group tag, readd it to all Fedora packages,
On Sun, Sep 23, 2018 at 2:13 PM Kevin Kofler wrote:
>
> Matthew Miller wrote:
> > Well, or "find plan c and work to make sure it's integrated in future
> > versions of dnfdragora".
>
> That would have to be done BEFORE we drop the comps entries though.
>
> > The RPM Group tag is very inflexible —
Matthew Miller wrote:
> Well, or "find plan c and work to make sure it's integrated in future
> versions of dnfdragora".
That would have to be done BEFORE we drop the comps entries though.
> The RPM Group tag is very inflexible — even beyond the "dewey decimal
> system" problem where the
Le samedi 22 septembre 2018 à 11:38 -0700, Adam Williamson a écrit :
>
> But at the same time I think Matt's right that comps -at least as it's
> currently set up - is kind of a really *bad* way of doing this, and
> that seems fairly well demonstrated by the problem I'm trying to solve
> - that
Le samedi 22 septembre 2018 à 11:29 -0700, Adam Williamson a écrit :
> On Sat, 2018-09-22 at 10:26 -0700, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> > On 09/21/2018 06:14 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > ...snip...
> > > The old gnome-packagekit, IIRC, also parsed groups and showed you
> > > all
> > > this stuff.
> > >
> On Sat, Sep 22, 2018 at 11:39:51AM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > > Somewhere halfway between those, in that I've talked with the GNOME
> > > Software
> > > dev about it in the past. Software presents "Categories" and "Featured
> > > Applications" -- the idea would be to extend that into
On Sat, Sep 22, 2018 at 11:39:51AM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > Somewhere halfway between those, in that I've talked with the GNOME Software
> > dev about it in the past. Software presents "Categories" and "Featured
> > Applications" -- the idea would be to extend that into also including
> >
On Sat, Sep 22, 2018 at 2:39 PM Adam Williamson
wrote:
>
> On Sat, 2018-09-22 at 13:07 +0200, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> > Adam Williamson wrote:
> > > While doing this extremely tedious task, it occurred to me to think:
> > > what the hell is the *point* of these 'optional' entries any more,
> > >
On Sat, 2018-09-22 at 12:30 -0400, Matthew Miller wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 21, 2018 at 07:14:37PM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > > Long (or, in my dreams, medium) term, I want to see the things that are
> > > now
> > > "Labs" be instead software bundles that can be installed via GNOME
> > >
On Sat, 2018-09-22 at 13:07 +0200, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Adam Williamson wrote:
> > While doing this extremely tedious task, it occurred to me to think:
> > what the hell is the *point* of these 'optional' entries any more,
> > anyway?
>
> They are required for Dnfdragora to list the available
On Sat, 2018-09-22 at 10:26 -0700, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> On 09/21/2018 06:14 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> ...snip...
> > The old gnome-packagekit, IIRC, also parsed groups and showed you all
> > this stuff.
> >
> > But...we don't do that any more. anaconda does not expose 'optional'
> > packages
On 09/21/2018 06:14 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
...snip...
> The old gnome-packagekit, IIRC, also parsed groups and showed you all
> this stuff.
>
> But...we don't do that any more. anaconda does not expose 'optional'
> packages in any way any more (you can only pick environment groups and
> their
On Sat, Sep 22, 2018 at 01:14:47PM +0200, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> > +1, drop 'em.
> Could you please consider the impact on the software we ship to our users,
> and thus on our users themselves, before rushing to vote, without giving any
> kind of rationale, for dropping essential functionality
On Fri, Sep 21, 2018 at 07:14:37PM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > Long (or, in my dreams, medium) term, I want to see the things that are now
> > "Labs" be instead software bundles that can be installed via GNOME Software
> > and other tools.
> When you say 'software bundle' are you thinking of
On Sat, Sep 22, 2018 at 01:07:27PM +0200, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> So I see only 2 alternatives:
> a) keep comps as it is now, including optional packages, OR
> b) undeprecate the RPM Group tag, readd it to all Fedora packages, and
>switch back to it.
> Any other plan will completely break
Matthew Miller wrote:
> +1, drop 'em.
Could you please consider the impact on the software we ship to our users,
and thus on our users themselves, before rushing to vote, without giving any
kind of rationale, for dropping essential functionality without a
replacement?
Kevin Kofler
Adam Williamson wrote:
> While doing this extremely tedious task, it occurred to me to think:
> what the hell is the *point* of these 'optional' entries any more,
> anyway?
They are required for Dnfdragora to list the available packages in a
categorized manner. Dropping them without replacement
On Fri, 2018-09-21 at 21:55 -0400, Matthew Miller wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 21, 2018 at 06:14:51PM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > So do we really need these acres of 'optional' packages in comps? I
> > mean, there are 2519 of them in comps-f30.xml.in. That's a lot. I
> > suspect no-one's looked
On Fri, Sep 21, 2018 at 06:14:51PM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> So do we really need these acres of 'optional' packages in comps? I
> mean, there are 2519 of them in comps-f30.xml.in. That's a lot. I
> suspect no-one's looked whether most of them make any sense for years.
> There are entire
45 matches
Mail list logo
