How important is comps.xml to us these days? Which packages should be in comps.xml and which not?

[Jesse Keating]

On Mon, 2008-09-22 at 09:41 +0100, Richard Hughes wrote:
> NSFU (not suitable for us) actually.

What's your definition of "us"?  Showing the users one set of package
information during install, and then a completely different one after
install is not suitable either.

Is "not suitable for us" supposed to mean that PK is trying to hard to
be generic across the distros so that we lose the classifications and
groupings we work on in Fedora, so that PK is not suitable for Fedora?

-- 
Jesse Keating
Fedora -- Freedom² is a feature!
identi.ca: http://identi.ca/jkeating
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/attachments/20080922/6a556d56/attachment.bin