-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 On 26-06-2011 12:23, Kent Fredric wrote: > On 26 June 2011 23:40, Rich Freeman <ri...@gentoo.org> wrote: >> >> I think we should avoid changing the fundamental design of portage, >> such as removing categories or allowing tags to be used as >> dependencies/etc. At least, not right now. If we set up namespaces >> for tags that might allow for such a thing in the future. > > At this time I vehemently oppose the idea of using tags for dependencies. > > If there was even a good reason to do this, I would probably want to > see the system working really well first. > >> The main driver behind tags seems to be searchability, and I think >> that is something we could easily improve. > > +1 > >> I don't think we should >> hold that up over an initiative to completely re-architect Gentoo... > > +1
I agree with the above. I've done my best to stay out of this discussion until now, but I see people going so far "out of the box", that I fear if we were to do this we would end up "breaking the box". - From past discussions about tags, I'd also like to recall a few ideas that have been completely ignored on this discussion: * tags should only be important for searching or classifying packages * tags should exist beyond portage / mostly use an on-line system * tags should be usable and maintainable by users * users should have a way to contribute directly to tags That's why in the past the discussion pointed to using an online system that users could contribute directly without having to wait on developers answering their requests, why it was seen as a manual system and why it didn't affect the package managers or tree. Being able to combine tags on metadata.xml for the tree and overlays with an on-line tagging system and have the tools use that data when searching seems an interesting option. - -- Regards, Jorge Vicetto (jmbsvicetto) - jmbsvicetto at gentoo dot org Gentoo- forums / Userrel / Devrel / KDE / Elections / RelEng -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.17 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJOBy3dAAoJEC8ZTXQF1qEPrJkP/2HhRwwj4GuhRyz7bXi3g9/U osmGEKj1f7dcLLCGNiS9AQ6aiCcOREXtq2uWkiMJHhILqfhm1bTLI/2OF7Vcmslh ImE5KzDlBfITb2Q6KxBppDfCwgYzclVKqMtyaeLq84O1PSmUn1tEaWaHzXlkVHI8 Uiae5rYSq/ikfbt1wQXXwQ3LBcgGbjfr8AWGvXTdnB9drGoNCezEfQaizuTuN6ib 1DmVj9MiHiQ+9+ixSCzJGJ7XryfEX1qEdWkn+rGqmN9CXXBQjjXOvHTVhIHbixQA 6+LWrVL/qjrzCUZ6Nsapgb5SbK+BQZoHD01oLs2Em7gum2+K7Z+gIiKVN5rUncaQ ExcIyOdnyZb8dyXYR/purSTEuTJv2vM6z6/EbV3XF4NsKfY8DQRq5x1h8+6ihMzE G/UT5Hqg8px0hbaWe4fHGNUzPaX8meu791Kw+GJd27Z2BJaZjP8VK5NSk0S3Y7XM SE0PNMdgLPBfcTK2Qw5WisH0DPwzfFWUoulCfvHGcZ/dfYC3SuideCfouHgkE8rT K7Y45c0h0A9QhEDSjRG3NFQzNU8tFfYvM8uy0GZr81SVMA1qFLvlVWR51kyGs/of a92wNdW0HqyN6nXTRLGcj8lFnv23Cqy0yi7Ya59Vkh1O0PMhIzl4GyghfnuszwYe sXzbYFYbsOMfY1tI/XCZ =OJ8M -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
