Interface::x11 vs X11::application

[Enrico Zini]

On Sat, Aug 16, 2014 at 08:29:34PM +0200, Benjamin Mesing wrote:

> > 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. 
> Yes I had the same thought, but decided for the practical route. On the
> other hand if we consider interface::3d implies interface::graphical
> everything is consistent.

Good point. Agreed.

> In conclusion I propose:
>       * Change description of interface::x11 to "Graphical" (one day we
>         should have a way to rename tags, or at least to provide
>         aliases)
>       * drop x11::application: _Enrico_ is there a way to auto merge the
>         packages from x11::application into interface::x11?
>       * keep interface::3d

I agree with your proposal.

I thought of a trick that can help with renaming tags:

 1. Add the new tag to the vocabulary, wait a day for the site to pick
    it up.
 2. Add the new tag to all packages that have the old tag:
    $ wget http://debtags.debian.net/exports/unstable-tags
    $ tagcoll grep old::tag unstable-tags -i|sed -e 's/$/: +new::tag/' > /tmp/patch
    $ debtags-submit-patch /tmp/patch
 3. Verify on the website that the packages do have the new tag.
 4. Remove the old tag from the vocabulary.

The same trick can be used to add interface::x11 to all packages that
have x11::application.


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/20140817/9f77581c/attachment.sig>