<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Fri, Apr 10, 2009 at 2:24 AM, Iain Arnell <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:iarnell@gmail.com">iarnell@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
<div class="im">On Fri, Apr 10, 2009 at 10:15 AM, Ralf Corsepius <<a href="mailto:rc040203@freenet.de">rc040203@freenet.de</a>> wrote:<br>
>><br>
>> On 04/10/2009 01:28 AM, Chris Weyl wrote:<br>
>>><br>
</div><div class="im">>>> Thoughts?<br>
><br>
> I am not excited about this plan, because I feel there is no "common subset"<br>
> of package which is general enough to be used as "devel group" in comps - I<br>
> feel much of what you say above is based on your personal individual<br>
> demands.<br>
><br>
> E.g. the list you provide above isn't even close to what I use for<br>
> perl-development. I think these are likely what you use for your individual<br>
> purposes.<br>
<br>
</div>I'm inclined to agree - it would certainly be impossible to decide on<br>
a Perl Development group that would be suitable for everyone.<br>
<br>
But it would be nice to have a group of things that might be<br>
interesting to developers without being forced to wade through more<br>
than 1200 individual '*perl*' rpms (and still missing eclipse-epic if<br>
you were looking for an IDE).</blockquote><div><br>That's where I was going with this. The packages I listed certainly aren't comprehensive -- and I hope I didn't give that impression -- just meant to be a starting point for discussion. The packages an individual person uses clearly vary, well, by person, but I don't think it's difficult to classify something as a "thing[] that might be interesting to developers".<br>
<br></div></div> -Chris<br>-- <br>Chris Weyl<br>Ex astris, scientia<br>