On Thu, Nov 22, 2001 at 08:51:23AM -0800, Randolph Chung wrote: > > Ok, will do, basically, it goes as this : > > > > Task: ocaml > > Section: devel > [...] > > We are still discussing this on the debian-ocaml-maint mailing list. > > When you've decided on the final list pls file a bug.
Ok, ... when is the deadline for potato inclusion ? > > BTW, is it better to do 2 tasks, one for the base stuff, the other for > > additional libraries, maybe not separated as above, or one lone big task, in > > order to not confuse the users ? > > One is better IMO. Ok, thought so also .... > > mmm, tricky thing here, how do you hope to discriminate between the tasks ? Do > > you have some kind of statistic on usage, or count downloads or something such ? > > It is a subjective decision, the 10% is just a guideline that we try to > follow. The rationale for this is that if there are too many task > packages listed in tasksel, it defeats the purpose of having an > interface for new users that is very easy to understand. > > I think ocaml is borderline. Joey, what do you think? So, if this don't works out, we should do meta packages ? Why not have more tasks, but classify them by levels of easiness or something such ? > The alternative to "tasks" are metapackages. For example, there is an > x-window-system-core metapackage. mmm, i thought these were obsolet, but i guess it is just that the task- was dropped from the metapackage name. In this case, it would be better to have 2 or more metapackages, or one alone ? Friendly, Sven Luther -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
