On Wed, 2014-04-09 at 08:39 -0400, Matthew Miller wrote: > On Wed, Apr 09, 2014 at 07:50:37AM -0400, Stephen Gallagher wrote: > > > I would say in the long run we should be working towards creating > > > separated locale,doc,man packages > > Hmm, I wonder if RPM 4.12 would allow us to do this with weak > > dependencies? > > Perhaps something like having a metapackage on the system for docs and > > one for each language. Then we could break up the doc and language > > packages into sub-packages that are installed conditionally on the > > presence of that metapackage on the system. > > Of course, I think there would still be work needed in RPM to support > > adding a language later, but maybe we could solve that with special > > tooling or a yum plugin. > > +1 to all of this. Needs: > > * rpm macros, possibly other RPM work > * packaging guidelines > * yum/dnf tooling > * a plan for realistically getting from where we are now to where we > want to be > * executing on that plan
From the desktop/workstation perspective, here are a few things I would like to see if we decide to work on this: Support for a new locale is more or less like a 'system extension' for the OS. It would be good to define clear rules for what it means to provide a subpackage that becomes part of this system extension. In an ideal world, this could even be automatic and pattern-based (e.g. if you install anything into /usr/lib64/gstreamer-1.0, you are providing a 'codec' extension, and all the files below that directory belong to it). To present this in the UI, we need to know the available 'extension points' (either a fixed list, or a way to enumerate them), as well as the installed and available extensions for each, including suitable metadata (name+short description at least). -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
