From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([69.77.167.62] helo=lists.gentoo.org)
	by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60)
	(envelope-from <gentoo-dev+bounces-29300-garchives=archives.gentoo.org@lists.gentoo.org>)
	id 1JM6GE-0008Ar-R1
	for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Mon, 04 Feb 2008 18:41:43 +0000
Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 467A3E058C;
	Mon,  4 Feb 2008 18:41:41 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183])
	by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 17D5DE058C
	for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Mon,  4 Feb 2008 18:41:41 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from gentoo.org (xray.science.oregonstate.edu [128.193.220.51])
	(using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits))
	(No client certificate requested)
	by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 92CBD65B4E
	for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Mon,  4 Feb 2008 18:41:40 +0000 (UTC)
Date: Mon, 4 Feb 2008 10:41:37 -0800
From: Donnie Berkholz <dberkholz@gentoo.org>
To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] new portage categories
Message-ID: <20080204184137.GA3887@comet.science.oregonstate.edu>
References: <92e3e00f0802040935j5414a163y3455c1e0c3cd7422@mail.gmail.com>
Precedence: bulk
List-Post: <mailto:gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gentoo-dev+help@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev+unsubscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev+subscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail <gentoo-dev.gentoo.org>
X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <92e3e00f0802040935j5414a163y3455c1e0c3cd7422@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.16 (2007-06-09)
X-Archives-Salt: 5fedd783-c0d0-4ece-b62d-8e5254f4f579
X-Archives-Hash: f9c9d7418af68f20f401d8f0e35a5aad

On 18:35 Mon 04 Feb     , Jonas Bernoulli wrote:
> So I ask you: why are there no such categories? Of course I can
> imagine a few reasons myself for not having more categories:
> 
> (1) a category must in general include n packages
> (2) more categories are evil, once we start creating new once there is no end
> (3) moving packages in the tree is bad, things break
> (4) who does all the work
> (5) subcategories would be better, but to implement this...
> ....
> 
> Please point me to any discussions on this subject. Keep in mind I am
> not demanding new categories, I am not even asking for them to be
> created. I simply would like to know why there aren't more. And if you
> developers are also interested in more categories I would love to make
> some suggestions and help with looking through the tree to see which
> packages would have to be moved.
> 
> Reasons why more categories might be usefull:

Sounds like what you really want are tags, not categories ...

You could play with adding them into metadata.xml and patching some 
existing search tools to search for them. I'm all for the idea of tags, 
and I think it's a better approach than categories.

Thanks,
Donnie
-- 
gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list