Bug 667898

+++ This bug was initially created as a clone of Bug #650028 +++

In the screen of software selection, there is a category named "Languages", there is a "Chinese Support".
Could we split this into "Simplified Chinese Support" and "Traditional Chinese Support" in Language Categories, as they are two different languages?

Here are the benefits after this split:
1. Only install fonts for one language. For example, wqy-zenhei-fonts for Simplified Chinese, and cjkuni-fonts for Traditional Chinese, no need to install both.
2. Only install input methods for one language. For example, pinyin input method for Simplified Chinese, and chewing input method for Traditional Chinese, also no need to install both.
3. Only install one kind of language pack. For example, *-zh_CN for Simplified Chinese, and *-zh_TW for Traditional Chinese, less packages as above. Example package name: openoffice.org-langpack-zh_CN, koffice-langpack-zh_CN.

--- Additional comment from clumens on 2010-11-05 10:29:20 EDT ---

Comps controls what package groups we list.

--- Additional comment from notting on 2010-11-05 15:10:29 EDT ---

Surely, they are different scripts, not different languages?  (Although, in practice this probably doesn't make any difference.)

--- Additional comment from pwu on 2010-11-07 21:20:16 EST ---

yes, they have different writing glyphs, Unicode code points and input methods.

--- Additional comment from petersen on 2010-11-07 23:47:43 EST ---

Ok, I talked to Peng Wu about this, and don't think
the intent was quite communicated fully.

We would like to ask if anaconda could support
lists of locales for language groups.

Then we could have Simplified Chinese for "zh_CN,zh_SG"
and Traditional Chinese for "zh_TW,zh_HK", etc.  Would
that be acceptable.  We might be able to contribute
a patch to do that if it helps.

Otherwise we will just have to duplicate Chinese groups
which will increase the comps maintenance burden.

--- Additional comment from petersen on 2010-12-02 00:35:17 EST ---

Any comments on this proprosal?

--- Additional comment from petersen on 2010-12-02 22:16:58 EST ---

Or can we get yum-langpacks working with anaconda now?

Then we could finally start to remove langpacks from comps!

--- Additional comment from pwu on 2010-12-20 00:10:47 EST ---

Here are the draft patch for this package group split:
http://pwu.fedorapeople.org/comps/split-package-group.patch

Feel free to comment it.

--- Additional comment from notting on 2010-12-20 15:24:12 EST ---

Jens - what's involved in comment #6?

--- Additional comment from petersen on 2010-12-20 19:26:03 EST ---

(In reply to comment #8)
> Jens - what's involved in comment #6?

Will input from the anaconda team for a start...
and testing I suppose. :)

--- Additional comment from petersen on 2010-12-20 19:28:50 EST ---

> input from the anaconda team for a start...

Would it be better to propose as a Feature?

--- Additional comment from dchen on 2011-01-03 18:43:22 EST ---

(In reply to comment #3)
> yes, they have different writing glyphs, Unicode code points and input methods.

Well, they share roughly 60% of characters (though there are preferences of glyphs, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Variant_Chinese_character 
and most phrases are same in both places.

However, I do support the split as Peng Wu suggestion. People who need to have both just tick both. :-)

--- Additional comment from pwu on 2011-01-07 00:26:04 EST ---

(In reply to comment #11)
> However, I do support the split as Peng Wu suggestion. People who need to have
> both just tick both. :-)

Hi, thanks for commenting. :-)

--- Additional comment from pwu on 2011-01-07 00:30:26 EST ---

Polling about this change on Fedora Chinese mailing list is finished.
Some users like this comps split for Simplified Chinese and Traditional Chinese Support, and seems no strong arguments for not splitting.
URL for discussion mail:
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/chinese/2010-December/004795.html
Could we try this comps split on Fedora 15?