By that logic we shouldn't have a development group at all since developers know what they need.


-AdamM (from Android )


On Apr 29, 2010 2:07 AM, "Ralf Corsepius" <rc040203@freenet.de> wrote:


On 04/28/2010 09:41 PM, Neal Becker wrote:

> Bill Nottingham wrote:
>
>> Rex Dieter (rdieter@math.un...
Make both optional.



Devs should know what they need, so there should not be any need to make

any of them default.



Ralf



--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listin...



--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

On 04/29/2010 09:24 AM, Adam Miller wrote:
> By that logic we shouldn't have a development group at all since developers
> know what they need.

I sense a misunderstanding.

Yes, IMO, any "default" (preselection) of "a devel group of packages"
hardly makes sense. However, marking packages as members of an optional
"devel group of packages" surely makes sense.

Or differently: One person's most valuable devel-tool is another
person's packaging bloat

Ralf


> -AdamM (from Android )
>
> On Apr 29, 2010 2:07 AM, "Ralf Corsepius"<rc040203@freenet.de> wrote:
>
> On 04/28/2010 09:41 PM, Neal Becker wrote:
>> Bill Nottingham wrote:
>>
>>> Rex Dieter (rdieter@math.un...
> Make both optional.
>
> Devs should know what they need, so there should not be any need to make
> any of them default.
>
> Ralf
>
>
>

--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel