Comment # 2 on bug 990357 from Peter Simons

(In reply to Jan Engelhardt from comment #0)
> Proposal to use a consistent rpm group "Development/Languages/Haskell" for
> all Haskell-related packages.

A Haskell package "foo" typically contains a library and one (or more)
executable programs. We split that package into 3 parts:

 - "foo" contains the executables,
 - "ghc-foo" contains the shared library, and
 - "ghc-foo-devel" contains interface files developers need to link the library
from "ghc-foo" info their own programs.

Now, each of those needs a Group. The "ghc-foo-devel" sub-package could live in
"Development/Languages/Haskell" just fine -- although I believe no such group
exists yet, so we'd have to create one. Currently, we use
"Development/Libraries/Other" for these packages.

The situation for "ghc-foo" is a little less clear. One *could* put it into
"Development/Languages/Haskell", I suppose, but the current choice
"System/Libraries" seems valid, too. I have no strong feelings about this
either way.

The "foo" sub-package, however, does not necessarily fit into either of those
groups. Take a program like ShellCheck or git-annex, for example. Those
executables are written in Haskell, but these are general-purpose tools that
ought to be classified elsewhere, i.e. git-annex is an extension of git and
should be in the same group as git is ("Development/Tools/Version Control").
That tag cannot be generated automatically, i.e. we need to manually maintain a
list of groups that we assign to those packages, where
"Development/Languages/Haskell" could be a default choice.