Crossing debtags and popcon

Andrea Bolognani eof at kiyuko.org
Sat Feb 3 16:19:41 CET 2007


On Sat, 3 Feb 2007 13:48:03 +0000
Justin B Rye <jbr at edlug.org.uk> wrote:

> > When the archive coverage will be complete, this won't be a problem anymore:
>
> Presumably this will happen some time after we run out of new
> software to add to the archive!

Not if we force any new package to be tagged.

Explain the need to tag every package in the New Maintainer's Guide. Add a
"should" in the Developer's Reference. Provide extensive documentation on how
to correctly tag a package, then add a lintian/linda check to make sure most
mentors won't sponsor untagged packages, or at least warn the maintainer.

> > the tags for the version in testing of a package will be correct and, even
> > if the version in unstable will have different tags, this would mean only
> > that some of the functionalities of the package are different, not that the
> > newer tags are better.
>
> Remember my example.  The foo-media-player in my Packages file is
> the Stable version, a role::dummy package that pulls in a -gui and
> -common packages; the package of that name in Sid is role::program
> and works-with-format::{all sorts of things that the Stable tag
> vocabulary has never heard of}.  In that situation, the newer tags
> are _worse_ for me.  Tag-archives outside the Packages file need
> release-name stamps.

Sorry, I don't really get this.

If you use Sarge, then role::dummy is the right tag. If you use Sid, then the
right tags are role::program and works-with-format::*.

Please correct me if I am wrong.

> Improved (and better-automated) coverage in the Packages file would
> be good; but I'm against having it entirely replace the online
> databases, because that would make things worse for my local users
> in two regards:
> * if the only way to correct a tag is to provide a well-formatted
> 	patch to the source tree, that's a barrier against
> 	contributions (especially from non-developers).

Or to file a bug against the package having wrong tags.
Non-developers already do this for all other kinds of bugs -- and yes, I
consider wrong tags to be a bug in the package. At least a wishlist one.

> * if there are no online archives, the only way to get corrected
> 	tags is via new package versions - and for Stable users,
> 	that means waiting years.  By which time foo-media-player
> 	may be role::dummy again.

You should get the tags related to the version of the package you have
currently installed.

If I have Sarge's foo-media-player installed, I want it to be tagged
role::dummy. I don't want it to appear in any search I perform against
works-with-format::whatever. That would be just wrong.

> Of course (going back to my original point) if the online archives
> are all tracking Sid, they're no use to Stable users.  However, if
> there was a separate online tag-archive for each release, it would
> be the Stable users who would need alioth the most, because they
> can't get tag corrections into their Packages file.

I think the main point here is that we have different ideas on how packages
should be tagged.

My point is that having the right tags for a package is maintainer's duty,
just like it's maintainer's duty to make sure the package works correctly and
bugs are fixed.

This of course would require some changes at the dpkg level, and tons of good
documentation.

The very same people who are volunteering their time to tag packages would do
exactly the same, but by filing bug reports instead of editing the tag
database directly.

I know it is a very broad task, and it will require a lot of work, but I think
we can do this in time for lenny.

--
KiyuKo <eof AT kiyuko DOT org>
Resistance is futile, you will be garbage collected.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/debtags-devel/attachments/20070203/e35b09f1/attachment.pgp


More information about the Debtags-devel mailing list