From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C18EE1381F3 for ; Fri, 5 Apr 2013 05:33:34 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id A4511E075F; Fri, 5 Apr 2013 05:33:30 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-ie0-f174.google.com (mail-ie0-f174.google.com [209.85.223.174]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B68ACE0656 for ; Fri, 5 Apr 2013 05:33:29 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-ie0-f174.google.com with SMTP id aq17so3852014iec.19 for ; Thu, 04 Apr 2013 22:33:28 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:x-received:reply-to:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=4/or94Ujqf1Owu/YLmWtuoE3e6zerdhkLVv2/gXoXtA=; b=fm1lr2UPHs3bKmiIKkq24W4+/w+q3lw7+WbS0IfSyUVOEwgQOytQpcZ+X/umNaArVc aefp0nU0S9Q5BMU5f+NwJw+LRZ9ISHdIsAjccFLcCGqI/GbWuhkMNLZIsAL+gLsfpswL 0Juo0fmjYJsjb98oU1SWKue9Xzrj+BGNqMMuc89BRcsbBIMCyC89GKq8bfEgH0gX9Mkt /XsOroKZPS12tvRlehZYR4LkRrr9rZMf69YsthsHY96ODYdZXVesSxCzlums4RjY8Ghy HH/WLwI0atzwpM89t2oDH9p7L+UE63NOxjBzSN92epHM0FBzwYXTo7vBq/HigcU0nbDc V4XQ== Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.50.17.234 with SMTP id r10mr631540igd.102.1365140008837; Thu, 04 Apr 2013 22:33:28 -0700 (PDT) Sender: yngwin@gmail.com Received: by 10.64.30.234 with HTTP; Thu, 4 Apr 2013 22:33:28 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <515ABAA7.6070500@gentoo.org> References: <51587263.6080505@politeia.in> <515ABAA7.6070500@gentoo.org> Date: Fri, 5 Apr 2013 13:33:28 +0800 X-Google-Sender-Auth: kbYXMqEuiD4dm7z1h07QHJXD5y0 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Expanding categories' descriptions From: Ben de Groot To: gentoo-dev Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=14dae9340ff54ba91304d9966d66 X-Archives-Salt: 31ed94f4-f8c6-4b52-9383-3d164b16f428 X-Archives-Hash: f8bd95e56e948f083071c5540325a348 --14dae9340ff54ba91304d9966d66 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 2 April 2013 19:01, Sergey Popov wrote: > 01.04.2013 11:52, Michael Palimaka =D0=BF=D0=B8=D1=88=D0=B5=D1=82: > > On 1/04/2013 04:29, Denis M. wrote: > >> I think it's a good idea to expand the categories' descriptions (found > >> in the corresponding metadata.xml files) with more accurate descriptio= ns > >> of which packages are welcome to fit in which categories. > >> > >> If expanding the metadata.xml files does not seem a good idea, we shou= ld > >> at least make a little bit more comprehensive description somewhere in > >> the gentoo.org/doc/ or wiki.gentoo.org pages. > >> > >> What do you think about it? > >> > > > > Sounds good to me. From time to time I see even experienced developers > > not sure as to which category a package belongs. > > > > There is also inconsistency with packages of a certain type being sprea= d > > over multiple categories. For example, packages containing "password > > manager" in the description currently exist in three different > categories. > > +1 for that. I was really confused(tbh, i am confused even now) about > x11-apps/x11-misc categories, for example. Sometimes it is really not > clear where package should goes. > > Another example - app-admin/ansible. Some devs thinks that it should be > sys-cluster/ansible, but i put it into app-admin/, relying on > app-admin/puppet as an example. > > So, some sort of clarification for such noobs, like me, would be really > appreciated :-) > > > I agree that it is a good idea. I also tried to be explicit when I added the dev-qt category. I'm sure we can benefit from more precise descriptions for all categories. So please come with some suggestions to get the ball rolling! --=20 Cheers, Ben | yngwin Gentoo developer Gentoo Qt project lead, Gentoo Wiki admin --14dae9340ff54ba91304d9966d66 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On 2= April 2013 19:01, Sergey Popov <pinkbyte@gentoo.org> wrot= e:
01.04.2013 11:52, Michael Palimaka =D0=BF=D0=B8=D1=88=D0=B5=D1=82:
> On 1/04/2013 04:29, Denis M. wrote:
>> I think it's a good idea to expand the categories' descrip= tions (found
>> in the corresponding metadata.xml files) with more accurate descri= ptions
>> of which packages are welcome to fit in which categories.
>>
>> If expanding the metadata.xml files does not seem a good idea, we = should
>> at least make a little bit more comprehensive description somewher= e in
>> the gentoo.or= g/doc/ or wiki.gen= too.org pages.
>>
>> What do you think about it?
>>
>
> Sounds good to me. From time to time I see even experienced developers=
> not sure as to which category a package belongs.
>
> There is also inconsistency with packages of a certain type being spre= ad
> over multiple categories. For example, packages containing "passw= ord
> manager" in the description currently exist in three different ca= tegories.

+1 for that. I was really confused(tbh, i am confused even now)= about
x11-apps/x11-misc categories, for example. Sometimes it is really not
clear where package should goes.

Another example - app-admin/ansible. Some devs thinks that it should be
sys-cluster/ansible, but i put it into app-admin/, relying on
app-admin/puppet as an example.

So, some sort of clarification for such noobs, like me, would be really
appreciated :-)



I agr= ee that it is a good idea. I also tried to be explicit when I added the dev= -qt category. I'm sure we can benefit from more precise descriptions fo= r all categories.

So please come with some suggestions t= o get the ball rolling!
<= br>--
Cheers,

Ben | yngwin
Gentoo developer
Gentoo Qt proj= ect lead, Gentoo Wiki admin
--14dae9340ff54ba91304d9966d66--