Re: Updated setup.ini with descriptions, categories, anddependencies

[Robert Collins <robert dot collins at itdomain dot com dot au>]

On 28 Aug 2001 11:27:14 -0400, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> I don't mind trashing the tool but I'd like to understand why the RPM
> categories are not acceptable.

Some of them are accurate-but-misleading. Take squid for instance. Yes
it is a daemon.. but its much more intuitive (for me) to look for it as
a "Net" item. 
 
> WRT, breaking up cygwin into two packages, I think that that would just be
> busy work.  It would complicate my life to do this and I think it would
> complicate all of our lives when the questions start cropping up on the
> mailing list.

I agree. Somehow my rename it to libcygwin got lost however - what are
your thoughts on that? (the goal being removing the current
cygwin-the-distro, cygwin-the-project, cygwin-the-package) confusion
somewhat by making it (cygwin-the-distro, cygwin-the-project,
libcygwin-the-package).

> Ditto, ssh.  I've never liked the server/client distinction in RPM.
I'd
> rather just keep ssh as one package.

Splitting _can_ have some benefits in terms of being able to do more
lightweight installs for non-development machines. Server/client
splitting IMO doesn't usually bring those benefits. 

And IMO the project really isn't big enough to needs such splits (yet).

Rob