enrico at enricozini.org
Mon Aug 18 11:55:34 UTC 2008
On Wed, Jul 30, 2008 at 10:39:30PM +0000, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
> Enrico Zini dixit:
> >On Wed, Jul 30, 2008 at 03:13:25PM +0000, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
> >Thanks for the suggestions. Let's have a look:
> >> suite::bsd
> >Can you name about 7 packages that would use this?
> mksh, quota stuff, openntpd, libbsd, libbsd-arc4random-perl,
> all of the GNU/kFreeBSD tools, am-utils, bsd-mailx, bsdcpio,
> bsdgames, bsdgames-nonfree, bsdmainutils, bsdtar, bsdutils,
> csh, cups-bsd, cupsys-bsd, dump, fwbuilder-bsd, heirloom-mailx == nail (?),
> isakmpd, libamu*, libedit*, lpr, netcat-openbsd, nvi, nvi-doc,
> openbsd-inetd, pmake
Ok, I added the tag to the vocabulary (contrarily to Zack, I believe
that both GNU and BSD can make sense as software suites) and added the
tag to these packages: mksh, openntpd, libbsd0, libbsd-dev,
libbsd-arc4random-perl, am-utils, bsd-mailx, bsdcpio, bsdgames,
bsdgames-nonfree, bsdmainutils, bsdtar, bsdutils, csh, cups-bsd,
cupsys-bsd, dump, heirloom-mailx, nail, isakmpd, fwbuilder-bsd,
libamu-dev, libamu4, libedit2, libedit-dev, lpr, netcat-openbsd, nvi,
nvi-doc, openbsd-inetd, pmake.
> >> use::scripting or something similar (for shell, perl, python, php, etc.)
> >The way I see it, something like a shell or python doesn't have to have
> >a use: that is, you can use them for pretty much any purpose.
> Hm at the moment I have use::login, if so I'd have to remove that.
> Wouldn't it be better to include as many uses as possible?
In theory yes, but in practice there's always a risk of including too
many and ending up with tags that are too specific, or that are subsets
of other tags, or that overlap with other tags.
Giving more thinking to it, how about use::programming? That would be
nice and broad, and cover a whole area that isn't currently covered by
use::* tags. Or possibly use::development (for Software or Hardware
Development): that would somehow cover the uses that are then
categorised in more detail with devel::* tags.
> >> devel::lang:shell (for dash, bash, ksh, pdksh, mksh, zsh, but NOT csh/tcsh)
> >> maybe you've got to add devel::lang:csh too though ;) dunno about heirloom-sh
> >This one's difficult: there are many shells, but every shell has some
> >scripting differences, which makes me worry whether "devel::lang:shell"
> >would mean anything at all for practical purposes.
> Superset of POSIX and somewhat compatible to it?
> Maybe include Bourne (heirloom-sh).
I'm pondering devel::lang:posix-sh, or devel::lang:sh-posix : comments?
GPG key: 1024D/797EBFAB 2000-12-05 Enrico Zini <enrico at debian.org>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
Url : http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/debtags-devel/attachments/20080818/50e43630/attachment.pgp
More information about the Debtags-devel