Re: groups storage - some common ground here too?

> I wouldn't call "apt's tasks" particularly flexible since they're just
> empty packages with dependencies. Might work better when carefully
> handcrafted (and in presence of Suggests and such) but the way I've been
> creating task- packages for RHL - automatically generating from comps.xml,
> being the lazy shmug I am - the task packages grow up to be hideous
> monsters and are more of a PITA than anything else. Using current 
> comps.xml more-or-less as is fine by me, I already wrote the Lua 
> groupinstall thingy even :)

hehe. Sounds good then :)
I'm not terribly familiar with apt's tasks so I wanted to make sure I
wasn't missing something.


> I don't see why not... like you said everybody is using similar 
> functionality one way or the other.

right, but I'd like to make sure it's similar enough so no one is left
out in the cold.

after all, the point of this whole list is to make sure no one is out in
the cold (at least I hope it is)

-sv