RFC: [ITP] Installation Profiles packages

[John Morrison]

On Wed, November 9, 2005 9:31 am, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> On Nov  8 18:13, Igor Pechtchanski wrote:
>> On Tue, 8 Nov 2005, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>> > On Tue, Nov 08, 2005 at 01:52:20PM -0500, Igor Pechtchanski wrote:
>> > >IMO, these packages should be in a special new category (I propose
>> the
>> > >name "@Profiles" to make setup put this at the top, but I don't know
>> if
>> > >setup will parse this correctly).  I've attached a few sample profile
>> > >packages for commonly requested configurations with the corresponding
>> > >setup.hints.  We could probably concentrate them all in one directory
>> > >(thus the '@ ...' lines at the top of the hint files).  All the
>> .tar.bz2
>> > >files are the same empty tarball -- it's the setup.hints that are
>> > >important.
>> > >
>> > >Comments and other suggestions welcome.  Note that the attached
>> packages
>> > >are an initial cut at defining those profiles -- I'm bound to have
>> missed
>> > >something.  Also, I'm not proposing to maintain *all* of the
>> profiles,
>> > >though I could maintain the ones I've attached, as there isn't too
>> much
>> > >work involved.
>> >
>> > Assuming that Corinna agrees, I'm willing to put these in a directory
>> in
>> > release.
>
> I like the idea.
>
>> > I'd like to get some consensus on the name "Profiles", though.  Is
>> that
>> > adequately intuitive?
>>
>> That's one of the things I wanted suggestions on.
>
> The main problem is to get the user to notice that this is something
> special.  I had a long hard look into the chooser window and it's
> not only that this meta category should come first, it should also
> be an eye catcher by its own, IMHO.
>
> Therefore I'd like to propose an all uppercase name for this category.
>
>   DEFAULT-PROFILES
>   USER-PROFILES

+1 on the caps...

How about

FUNCTIONAL-[GROUPS|PROFILES]
USEFUL-[GROUPS|PROFILES]
PRESELECTED-[GROUPS|PROFILES|PACKAGES]

?

J.