[Debtags-devel] Two new tags?

[Justin B Rye]

Erich Schubert wrote:
>> Wouldn't that mean a couple of hundred new tags, from suite::abiword
>> through to suite::zsh, which are going to need to somehow find their
>> way onto the appropriate sets of packages?
> 
> None of these are good examples (I'm not aware of any additional zsh
> packages...).

"apt-cache pkgnames | grep ^zsh | wc -l" = 8.  If the criterion is
simply being a set of five or more packages, it's a suite.  If there
is some other criterion, then we're back to:

>>>> What we need is a rule of thumb for which ones deserve to be called
>>>> suites.  Any suggestions, or should we just count the number of
>>>> packages that would be in the "suite" and set a minimum?

I would agree that zsh isn't really a suite; Abiword on the other
hand claims to be an office suite, though I'd argue that even with
nine members it's too small to deserve a tag of its own.  These
aren't meant to be interpreted as my best suggestions, they're just
the first candidates to catch my eye at each extreme end of the
alphabet, to illustrate that there could be literally hundreds.

> But how about suite::openoffice? suite::gnome-office? suite::koffice?
> suite::xfce? suite::eclipse? suite::monodev? suite::lamphp,
> suite::lampy, suite::lampl?

Openoffice and xfce already are suites, the gnome and kde office
suites are subsets of the existing suite::gnome and ::kde, and the
others don't exist - or anyway, "apt-cache pkgnames | grep ^$FOO"
gets me no hits for stable/main.  (Ah, wait, a wave of "^eclipse-"
packages has just reached my testing box!)

>> Or is the AI-tagger going to be able to handle this sort of task?
> 
> Actually many of these can be derived from metapackages.

That's useful.  All the dedicated plugins for emacs (or gimp,
gkrellm, xmms etc) aren't directly pulled in by any metapackage, 
though - the tagger would need to pay attention to a variety of
other kinds of dependency.
-- 
JBR
Ankh kak! (Ancient Egyptian blessing)