On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 1:14 PM, Ciaran McCreesh <[email protected]> wrote: > On Thu, 27 Mar 2014 03:53:47 +0100 > yac <[email protected]> wrote: >> What I was describing is the difference between fundamental properties >> of categories and tags. > > You are trying to redefine categories in terms of a concept that they > didn't originally represent.
No one's redefining anything. You seem awfully fixated on the history that forced categories to exist, which doesn't really matter in this context. Regardless of any of that, people can and _do_ attempt to use categories as a rudimentary method of attempting to search for packages. As you and several others have so eloquently pointed out, that's not their "purpose". Concurrently, from the other direction, myself and several others have noted that they're thoroughly inadequate for that anyway. That's why this topic keeps coming up and why this (work-in-progress) GLEP exists in the first place. > From a package mangler perspective, > categories aren't just "a label" for a package. They're fundamentally > part of a package's name. > >From that standpoint, they're even less adequate for lookup; encoding metadata in names has never turned out well for anyone. Cheers, Wyatt
