Re: debtags facet for sections (Re: Sections - especially section:kde and section:gnome)

Enrico Zini writes: > What I intend to do is to form subcommittees by broad topics: "The Gnome > Guys", "The KDE Guys", "The Web Developers", "The Photographers" and so > on. Or "People who take care of tag X". > > Such groups should have the ultimate say on a set of tags, including > being able

Re: debtags facet for sections (Re: Sections - especially section:kde and section:gnome)

On Thu, Jan 08, 2009 at 07:59:32PM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote: > This is one of the reasons why I find working on debtags for my packages > rather unrewarding. I have no real indication that the decisions I'm > making about what tags make sense have much in common with the decisions > everyone els

Re: Sections - especially section:kde and section:gnome

On mer, 2009-01-07 at 10:56 -0600, Manoj Srivastava wrote: > If we are talking about changing the aptitude interface, may I > request that there should be attention paid to the different needs of > searching/selecting versus browsing? And that browsing is still a valid > activity (because of the

Re: Re: Sections - especially section:kde and section:gnome

On Fri, 2009-01-02 at 09:34 +, Sune Vuorela wrote: > Hi! > > I have been wondering over the last months about Section: kde. > What is the correct usage of this section? .. I have tried to summarised some of the ideas of this thread in http://wiki.debian.org/DiscussionsAfterLenny/Section

Re: Sections - especially section:kde and section:gnome

On Fri, 2009-01-02 at 09:34 +, Sune Vuorela wrote: > Hi! > > I have been wondering over the last months about Section: kde. > What is the correct usage of this section? .. I have tried to summarised some of the ideas of this thread in http://wiki.debian.org/DiscussionsAfterLenny/Sections

Re: Sections - especially section:kde and section:gnome

Jon Dowland writes: > At present, the archive maintainers are responsible for defining them > and the list is kept in the policy document (2.4). Note that this list > is only their names. > > includes english text > descriptions of the sections. > > * would

Re: Sections - especially section:kde and section:gnome

OK, establishing that we are not going to get rid of the sections in the near future, what are people's thoughts on enhancing the definition of them slightly? At present, the archive maintainers are responsible for defining them and the list is kept in the policy document (2.4). Note that this lis

Re: debtags facet for sections (Re: Sections - especially section:kde and section:gnome)

Clint Adams writes: > That's not really a fair comparison; libdevel, perl, and python, are > relatively new sections that the ftpmasters added unilaterally, and doc > has been used inconsistently by the ftpteam in the past. There is also > minimal motivation (at least for me) to update the secti

Re: debtags facet for sections (Re: Sections - especially section:kde and section:gnome)

On Thu, Jan 08, 2009 at 07:09:48PM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote: > The maintainers are really bad at it? lintian.d.o alas has a ton of > evidence of this, even for the very easy cases. Consider: > > http://lintian.debian.org/tags/dev-package-should-be-section-libdevel.html > http://lintian.debian.o

Re: debtags facet for sections (Re: Sections - especially section:kde and section:gnome)

Charles Plessy writes: > now that the "base" section has been removed (Policy 3.8.0.0), is it > still necessary to override the management of the Section field instead > of simply trusting the maintainers? The maintainers are really bad at it? lintian.d.o alas has a ton of evidence of this, eve

Re: debtags facet for sections (Re: Sections - especially section:kde and section:gnome)

Le January 8, 2009 05:50:02 pm Charles Plessy, vous avez écrit : > Le Thu, Jan 08, 2009 at 03:02:23PM -0500, Filipus Klutiero a écrit : > > I don't understand why you suggest creating a debtags facet replacing > > sections, except if you plan to give exclusive control on it to the > > archive maint

Re: debtags facet for sections (Re: Sections - especially section:kde and section:gnome)

Le Thu, Jan 08, 2009 at 03:02:23PM -0500, Filipus Klutiero a écrit : > I don't understand why you suggest creating a debtags facet replacing > sections, except if you plan to give exclusive control on it to the > archive maintenance team as opposed to the rest of the tags. Hi Filipus and all

debtags facet for sections (Re: Sections - especially section:kde and section:gnome)

IMO, it would make sense to merge Debian sections into a debtags facet so that you can have multiple sections when it makes sense. The facet could still be controlled by ftpmasters if that was desired. I don't understand why you suggest creating a debtags facet replacing sections, except if you

Usefulness of sections (Re: Sections - especially section:kde and section:gnome)

Le January 7, 2009 02:32:24 am Joerg Jaspert, vous avez écrit : > > I don't remember using sections in over 4 years of Debian usage, though > > I had already used GNU/Linux for a few months before I switched to > > Debian. But I doubt even a user new to GNU/Linux would use them much. > > Everyone t

Re: What is a game or which section do game console emulators belong to (was: Sections - especially section:kde and section:gnome)

On Tue, Jan 06, 2009 at 11:00:13AM +0900, Paul Wise wrote: > Personally I'm not sure what the reason sections were introduced, I assume it was because from a flat FTP hierachy it was not very easy to tell what kind of purpose a particular .deb had back in 1993. Michael -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, ema

Re: Sections - especially section:kde and section:gnome

> IMO, it would make sense to merge Debian sections into a debtags facet > so that you can have multiple sections when it makes sense. The facet > could still be controlled by ftpmasters if that was desired. And aptitude > could use that facet to keep a logical tree but a package could then > appe

Re: Sections - especially section:kde and section:gnome

On Wed, Jan 07 2009, Joerg Jaspert wrote: >> I don't remember using sections in over 4 years of Debian usage, though >> I had already used GNU/Linux for a few months before I switched to >> Debian. But I doubt even a user new to GNU/Linux would use them much. > > Everyone that uses a tool like apt

Re: Sections - especially section:kde and section:gnome

Hi, On Wed, Jan 07, 2009 at 09:02:21AM +0100, Raphael Hertzog wrote: > On Wed, 07 Jan 2009, Joerg Jaspert wrote: > > > > > I don't remember using sections in over 4 years of Debian usage, though > > > I had already used GNU/Linux for a few months before I switched to > > > Debian. But I doubt eve

Re: Sections - especially section:kde and section:gnome

On Wed, Jan 07, 2009 at 08:32:24AM +0100, Joerg Jaspert was heard to say: > > > I don't remember using sections in over 4 years of Debian usage, though > > I had already used GNU/Linux for a few months before I switched to > > Debian. But I doubt even a user new to GNU/Linux would use them much.

Re: Sections - especially section:kde and section:gnome

On Wed, 07 Jan 2009, Joerg Jaspert wrote: > > > I don't remember using sections in over 4 years of Debian usage, though > > I had already used GNU/Linux for a few months before I switched to > > Debian. But I doubt even a user new to GNU/Linux would use them much. > > Everyone that uses a tool li

Re: Sections - especially section:kde and section:gnome

> I don't remember using sections in over 4 years of Debian usage, though > I had already used GNU/Linux for a few months before I switched to > Debian. But I doubt even a user new to GNU/Linux would use them much. Everyone that uses a tool like aptitude does use them much. I guess similar is tru

Re: Re: Sections - especially section:kde and section:gnome

On ven, 2009-01-02 at 16:55 +0100, Joerg Jaspert wrote: > I guess we actually need to consider what the sections are good for. > > Asking in a random irc channel at least didn't reveal any real > answers. > > So what about

Re: What is a game or which section do game console emulators belong to (was: Sections - especially section:kde and section:gnome)

On Tue, Jan 6, 2009 at 4:27 AM, Evgeni Golov wrote: > In my understanding otherosfs should be used for tools that are used > for reading or manipulating filesystems of other OS (like dosfstools > and mtools) - that isn't done by emulators directly (or at least the > user doesn't see how that happ

What is a game or which section do game console emulators belong to (was: Sections - especially section:kde and section:gnome)

Hey, On Fri, 2 Jan 2009 09:34:50 + (UTC) Sune Vuorela wrote: > I have been wondering over the last months about Section: kde. > What is the correct usage of this section? > > Is it for packages that is related to the desktop itself or is it for > packages that links against kdelibs ? > > Sh

Re: Sections - especially section:kde and section:gnome

On ven, 2009-01-02 at 16:55 +0100, Joerg Jaspert wrote: > I guess we actually need to consider what the sections are good for. > > Asking in a random irc channel at least didn't reveal any real > answers. > > So what about killing the concept of sections entirely ? > > Sure, if at some point a rep

Re: Sections - especially section:kde and section:gnome

Le vendredi 02 janvier 2009 à 14:17 +0100, Joerg Jaspert a écrit : > Is it usable without large parts of KDE installed? web. Does it need > lots of KDE? kde. (Where lots is debatable, but kdelibs, kicker, and > some of the central parts of it would probably be a good guess) Using such criteria is

Re: Sections - especially section:kde and section:gnome

> I guess we actually need to consider what the sections are good for. > Asking in a random irc channel at least didn't reveal any real answers. > So what about killing the concept of sections entirely ? Sure, if at some point a replacement is suitable and *well integrated* into those Debian tools

Re: Sections - especially section:kde and section:gnome

On Fri, 2009-01-02 at 13:43 +, Sune Vuorela wrote: > I guess we actually need to consider what the sections are good for. > Asking in a random irc channel at least didn't reveal any real > answers. > So what about killing the concept of sections entirely ? The primary user of section: is packa

Re: Sections - especially section:kde and section:gnome

On 2009-01-02, Joerg Jaspert wrote: > >> What is the correct usage of this section? >> Is it for packages that is related to the desktop itself or is it for >> packages that links against kdelibs ? > >> Should a game using kdelibs go to section:games or section:kde? > > games. > >> should a web br

Re: Sections - especially section:kde and section:gnome

> What is the correct usage of this section? > Is it for packages that is related to the desktop itself or is it for > packages that links against kdelibs ? > Should a game using kdelibs go to section:games or section:kde? games. > should a web browser using kdelibs go to section:web or section

Sections - especially section:kde and section:gnome

Hi! I have been wondering over the last months about Section: kde. What is the correct usage of this section? Is it for packages that is related to the desktop itself or is it for packages that links against kdelibs ? Should a game using kdelibs go to section:games or section:kde? should a web b