Interface::x11 vs X11::application

[Enrico Zini]

On Wed, Aug 06, 2014 at 10:56:40PM +0200, Benjamin Mesing wrote:

> one thing that has always confused me is, that we have those two tags.
> To me it seems that X11::application should be dropped in favour of
> interface::x11.
> 
> Any objections? Could we autoapply packages interface::x11 with
> X11::application.
> 
> Btw. at one point interface::X11 should be changed to
> interface::graphical

Good question. My intention with the x11 facet was to see things from
the point of view of the X server and protocol. So you have X apps,
window managers, compositing managers, libs, servers, drivers.

It's a useful point of view wrt window managers, servers, drivers.
"apps" doesn't make much practical sense, and I don't mind if it gets
dropped.

I agree in general principles to the s/x11/graphical/; one may argue
that 3d is also graphical, and at the same time, nobody would use
interface::2d. Does interface::3d make practical sense at all, by the
way?


Enrico

-- 
GPG key: 4096R/E7AD5568 2009-05-08 Enrico Zini <enrico at enricozini.org>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/debtags-devel/attachments/20140816/0a6c825c/attachment.sig>