RPM Group vs. Sugar
 

Hi,


the Sugar activity guidelines
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:SugarActivityGuidelines#Sample_SPEC

instruct using Sugar/Activities as the RPM Group. Is using non-standard
RPM groups in Fedora really allowed? The Creating Package HOWTO suggests
that it is not, although AFAIK no guideline actually states anything
about it.

Of course, RPM groups are not very meaningful anymore as comps are
used...
--
Jussi Lehtola
Fedora Project Contributor
jussilehtola@fedoraproject.org

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

RPM Group vs. Sugar
 

2010/1/31 Jussi Lehtola <jussilehtola@fedoraproject.org>:
> Hi,
>
>
> the Sugar activity guidelines
> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:SugarActivityGuidelines#Sample_SPEC
>
> instruct using Sugar/Activities as the RPM Group. Is using non-standard
> RPM groups in Fedora really allowed? The Creating Package HOWTO suggests
> that it is not, although AFAIK no guideline actually states anything
> about it.
>
> Of course, RPM groups are not very meaningful anymore as comps are
> used...

Let's take a step back. Why are RPM groups necessary anymore?
Moreover, since it's a staticly defined list that runs the risk of
being uselessly out of date in terms of practically named and defined
categories, we either need to keep it up to date upstream, which means
actively pointing out why we need it, or we should ask upstream to
ditch it.

Just my two cents.

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