FE Package Status of Aug 15, 2006

[Denis Leroy]

erbatiChristian Iseli wrote:
> Hi folks,
> 
> Here comes this week's report.  I've tried to further trim the list of
> missing packages in comps.xml by looking at owners.list.  Packages
> with this RE (binding|library|module|utilit) in their short description
> are excluded.

I'm not a huge fan of this exclusion mechanism, it is approximate and 
yields lots of false positives (both ways). As a result, people are 
confused as to what should or should not go into the comps file, and the 
overall value of comps is reduced. Worse, people will start writing 
artifical package descriptions to make sure they include one of those words.

Also, the wiki states that the comps file should only include packages 
that make sense for a user to include, i.e. a graphical application. Yet 
the comps file seems to include a lot more than that already, 
command-line-only utilities, devel packages.

There needs to be at least a robust way to exclude packages from the 
comps categorization, whether that's an extra entry in the owner file, 
or preferrably an actual file checked into the module directory ?

-denis