| 1 |
On 1/04/2013 04:29, Denis M. wrote: |
| 2 |
> Hello, |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
> (I was redirected from gentoo-doc@ to ask this here.) |
| 5 |
> |
| 6 |
> I think it's a good idea to expand the categories' descriptions (found |
| 7 |
> in the corresponding metadata.xml files) with more accurate descriptions |
| 8 |
> of which packages are welcome to fit in which categories. |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> The current descriptions are very vague and aren't probably in the best |
| 11 |
> shape to bring users' a good idea what certain category is about and |
| 12 |
> what packages are to be found there. |
| 13 |
> |
| 14 |
> This can also be an issue for (new) ebuild-writers (either |
| 15 |
> user-contributed ebuilds or just gentoo developers that are not sure0-000-p |
| 16 |
> about it either). |
| 17 |
> hat t |
| 18 |
> This is of course checked by a gentoo developer if new ebuilds are to be |
| 19 |
> submitted via the bugzilla, but I still think we should provide a better |
| 20 |
> understanding of the categories. |
| 21 |
> |
| 22 |
> If expanding the metadata.xml files does not seem a good idea, we should |
| 23 |
> at least make a little bit more comprehensive description somewhere in |
| 24 |
> the gentoo.org/doc/ or wiki.gentoo.org pages. |
| 25 |
> |
| 26 |
> What do you think about it? |
| 27 |
> |
| 28 |
> |
| 29 |
> Regards, |
| 30 |
> Denis M. (Phr33d0m) |
| 31 |
> |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
Sounds good to me. From time to time I see even experienced developers |
| 34 |
not sure as to which category a package belongs. |
| 35 |
|
| 36 |
There is also inconsistency with packages of a certain type being spread |
| 37 |
over multiple categories. For example, packages containing "password |
| 38 |
manager" in the description currently exist in three different categories. |
Archives