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

2009-01-14 Thread Enrico Zini
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 else

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

2009-01-14 Thread Russ Allbery
Enrico Zini enr...@enricozini.org 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

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

2009-01-08 Thread Filipus Klutiero
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

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

2009-01-08 Thread Charles Plessy
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

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

2009-01-08 Thread Filipus Klutiero
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 maintenance

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

2009-01-08 Thread Russ Allbery
Charles Plessy ple...@debian.org 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

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

2009-01-08 Thread Clint Adams
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

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

2009-01-08 Thread Russ Allbery
Clint Adams sch...@debian.org 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