Re: some simple questions/observations about package groups

[Paul Eggleton <paul.eggleton@linux.intel.com>]

On Thursday 29 November 2012 06:58:02 Robert P. J. Day wrote:
> On Thu, 29 Nov 2012, Paul Eggleton wrote:
> > On Wednesday 28 November 2012 15:27:58 Chris Larson wrote:
> > > Also, to comment on something tangentially related from a different
> > > thread,
> > > technically the PACKAGE_GROUP_ variables were the first to use the term
> > > as
> > > far as I'm aware. *tasks* were then renamed to use that name as well,
> > > which
> > > is where a bunch of the confusion probably got introduced.
> > 
> > I did mention that:
> > > PACKAGE_GROUP_* actually came first as a way to
> > > define items for IMAGE_FEATURES that map to one or more packages, and
> > > I'm
> > > not  sure the name choice was a particularly good one - I wonder if it
> > > would be worth considering renaming it to something like
> > > IMAGE_FEATURE_PACKAGES in order to avoid confusion, although obviously
> > > every rename like this has a cost associated.
> 
>   before i forgot all of this, i lashed together this wiki page for my
> own benefit so i'd have some examples to show students:
> 
> http://www.crashcourse.ca/wiki/index.php/OE_package_groups
> 
> it's admittedly in rough form and could use some polishing but it will
> do for now.  feedback?  errors?

You're describing those things defined by PACKAGE_GROUP_* as package groups, 
which I would strongly advise against. I know the naming of PACKAGE_GROUP_* 
suggests that the two are part of the same thing but they really aren't. Most 
of this page apart from section 5 is actually talking about IMAGE_FEATURES and 
should be reworded as such if you want to reduce confusion rather than 
increasing it.

Cheers,
Paul

-- 

Paul Eggleton
Intel Open Source Technology Centre