From 1be510f9529cb082f802408b472a77d074b394c0 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Nicolas Vigier Date: Sun, 14 Apr 2013 13:46:12 +0000 Subject: Add zarb MLs html archives --- zarb-ml/mageia-dev/2012-September/018563.html | 104 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 104 insertions(+) create mode 100644 zarb-ml/mageia-dev/2012-September/018563.html (limited to 'zarb-ml/mageia-dev/2012-September/018563.html') diff --git a/zarb-ml/mageia-dev/2012-September/018563.html b/zarb-ml/mageia-dev/2012-September/018563.html new file mode 100644 index 000000000..3579ae011 --- /dev/null +++ b/zarb-ml/mageia-dev/2012-September/018563.html @@ -0,0 +1,104 @@ + + + + [Mageia-dev] Update of the rpm group policy + + + + + + + + + +

[Mageia-dev] Update of the rpm group policy

+ Thierry Vignaud + thierry.vignaud at gmail.com +
+ Sat Sep 8 14:39:57 CEST 2012 +

+
+ +
On 8 September 2012 14:29, Remco Rijnders <remco at webconquest.com> wrote:
+>> 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.
+
+Yes it may be better.
+_Then_, we'll need to update
+http://svnweb.mageia.org/soft/rpmdrake/trunk/Rpmdrake/icon.pm?view=markup
+
+ + + + + + + + + + +
+

+ +
+More information about the Mageia-dev +mailing list
+ -- cgit v1.2.1