Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Jan Matejka <yac@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC GLEP 1005: Package Tags
Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2014 07:56:57
Message-Id: 20140325085507.2a863b5d@deathstar
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC GLEP 1005: Package Tags by Joshua Kinard
1 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
2 Hash: SHA512
3
4 On Sun, 23 Mar 2014 17:40:20 -0400
5 Joshua Kinard <kumba@g.o> wrote:
6 >
7 > TBH, I don't like the use of XML at all.
8
9 No, we don't need to go one level (format) deeper.
10
11 > The 'all' thing is probably unnecessary
12
13 What problem does having 'all' tag solve? Seems pretty useless to me.
14
15 > Granted, a tag of "dev" offers no value (dev-python ->
16 > 'dev','python'), but if you were looking for a web browser versus a
17 > web server, having default tags of 'www','client' or 'www','servers'
18 > helps for packages in www-client and www-servers.
19
20 This might be helpful but rather as one-time, initial, hand-picked
21 generation on case-by-case (by the category) basis.
22
23 > I've always wondered is we allowed portage to have one additional
24 > level of nesting if that'd help any (i.e., games-* -> games/*).
25
26 Squashing games-*/ to just games/ and defining genre by tags. Seems
27 pretty doable, I like this.
28
29 - --
30 Jan Matějka | Gentoo Developer
31 https://gentoo.org | Gentoo Linux
32 GPG: A33E F5BC A9F6 DAFD 2021 6FB6 3EBF D45B EEB6 CA8B
33 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
34 Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux)
35
36 iQEcBAEBCgAGBQJTMTZeAAoJEIN+7RD5ejah85gIAItDtxuEntu2nhb4uvltKHfu
37 dpnT0KePuAZKwV8H59jRx7AovfMo9nTjqs88Sgw6v9NbbKNxRmW3PPWmuJUnLniU
38 eG31vMsUJ1CgXxNLWaXaYZRi1QTYnJqJM5LDnfFsh4mj9Dk7t1/XCA6rKcICO3qQ
39 sqEDaSAyOYLBsTGPOyC2trrZNAsLEu2oLImzECXNHa6tNMJt75BJdGfKzFDTGBtF
40 XiG/qi2IV7ClYxVZP4W1LwN+SVUmLiEDUyMeP6FRgVdEmZcdlQGLm6kBiYD0A/2F
41 xeWHPoQpgkPRZuLRNv0vvvatO+A2KpXY1rs0s3BYb0xk3MDEGwE+X1ZrcDRVsIg=
42 =5YXb
43 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC GLEP 1005: Package Tags hasufell <hasufell@g.o>