| 1 |
On Tue, 21 Jun 2011 16:24:07 +0200 |
| 2 |
Michał Górny <mgorny@g.o> wrote: |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> Hello, |
| 5 |
> |
| 6 |
> As we discussed for a while, the media-sound/ category has grown |
| 7 |
> very large and it may be a good idea to split it. |
| 8 |
> |
| 9 |
> Right now, it contains audio players, editing software, converters, |
| 10 |
> sound systems and a lot of other utilities related to sound. |
| 11 |
> Splitting that up would make looking up software easier for users |
| 12 |
> (e.g. if I want to take a look at what audio players we have, I |
| 13 |
> don't need to see all other programs). |
| 14 |
> |
| 15 |
> What do you think? What new category/-ies do you suggest? |
| 16 |
> |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
Whatever happened to implementing tags for the Portage tree? The idea |
| 19 |
behind tags was to avoid spamming users with more and more |
| 20 |
directories, especially for apps that are hard to categorize. Which, |
| 21 |
arguably, is most of them. We have tags for weblog content/topics; |
| 22 |
tags for ebuilds are also a good idea. |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
Splitting up the media-* categories doesn't solve any problems for |
| 25 |
the packages that do many different things, whether encoding, |
| 26 |
playing, editing, wrapping, connecting, etc. Many media apps belong |
| 27 |
in 3 or 4 or more categories. Tags are the right solution for these, |
| 28 |
rather than being pigeonholed into just one category, which only |
| 29 |
reflects one use. |
Archives