'IT Security' in comps?

[Till Maas]

On Thu, Aug 06, 2009 at 09:07:13PM +0200, Till Maas wrote:

> > It's about not presenting bad UI and bad groups to our users - it's 
> > a design thing.
> 
> I do not agree that my groups are bad or that they are bad by their
> nature. Nevertheless, I do not see that this discussion is leading
> anywhere, that will allow to fulfill my needs (Easy installation of the
> software, easy finding of the software, allowing many people to do this
> and not maintaining the same information in several places) and your
> requests. Also it looks for me that you do not want these groups at any
> cost, because of the way you argue.

Thanks to Rahul, there may be a compromise that will be good enough for
me and might to acceptable for you.
1) Create the groups with the it-security-prefix
2) Toggle uservisible to false
3) Do not add a category for the groups

Then the exposure to uninterested users will be minimal, but interested
users can still install the packages easily with 'yum install @it-sec*'
and the search can maybe done with some yum plugin or a different
application and the ifnromation is still managed centrally.

Regards
Till
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 835 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/attachments/20090806/e474c846/attachment.bin