use::developing

[Benjamin Mesing]

Hello

> It's not so much the idea of use::developing being added to the
> vocabulary that worries me - it's the idea of having to go through
> the 7000-odd packages with devel::* or role::devel-lib tags and
> decide whether to add a use::developing tag for each one.
I would say, that everything tagged devel::* can be implied to be
use::developing. In my opinion, the devel:: facet is conceptually
located inside the use:: facet. Perhaps we get some false positives, but
I doubt it will be many.
Besides we are having this kind of problem (in a smaller scale)
everytime we introduce a new tag. We need to trust the community to fix
that tagging over time (which is really easy now, due to the very nice
web interface!).


> For instance, if I find a package is already tagged use::editing,
> does that mean it doesn't need to be tagged use::developing?
I'd say yes. A package should be tagged use::developing, if software
development is one of the primary use cases for the package. E.g. I
would say, that the KDE texteditor "kate" could well be tagged
use::developing, since its features set is targeted for development
(syntax highlighting, capabilities for comments and so on). 

Best regards 

Ben