[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: 'IT Security' in comps?



On Wed, Aug 05, 2009 at 10:00:24AM -0400, Bill Nottingham wrote:
> Recently, you've added the following groups to comps:
> 
> it-security-code-analysis
> it-security-forensics
> it-security-intrusion-detection
> it-security-reconnaissance
> it-security-wireless
> it-security-password-recovery
> 
> You've also added a new toplevel category. This means this new nebulous
> 'IT Securty' item is pushed at the toplevel, much as 'Desktops' or
> 'Language Support'. That seems misplaced to me. 

How can I bundle the groups, if not with a category? Or can there be
subcategories?

> While I know that we do allow some discretion in adding to comps, none
> of this was discussed beforehand on this list (that I saw), or in FESCo.
> These sorts of large scale changes are the sorts of things that should
> be discussed.

I asked on this list and got a reply from Jesse Keating:
https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2009-May/msg02292.html

> What is the overall goal of these changes?

The goal is to make it easier to find software related to specific IT security
related tasks.

> Why isn't this just done via a menus package in the security spin?
> Wouldn't that be more useful?

No, because this does not help me with my search from yum. Btw. this is
true for other package groups, too. E.g. we have a KDE spin and a KDE
group in comps.

> Many of these packages are *already* in other groups; having them
> now be explicitly listed in multiple groups doesn't really make sense
> to me, especially when we already have 'Administration Tools' and
> 'System Tools' groups.

I believe the restriction that packages may only belong to one  group is
gone. I don't see why it is not helpful to be easily able to install
these related packages.

Regards
Till

Attachment: pgpzTEXvQaZiV.pgp
Description: PGP signature


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]