Re: Description-less packages file
Hi Lucas,
On Tue, Feb 07, 2012 at 10:15:44AM +0100, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> On 07/02/12 at 09:11 +0100, Andreas Tille wrote:
> > [Joerg in CC in case he might not read debian-qa,
> > Lucas in CC because I was somehow expecting some answer from him
> > in this thread]
>
> Heh :)
;-)
> > Hi Stuart,
> >
> > On Mon, Feb 06, 2012 at 11:26:11PM +0000, Stuart Prescott wrote:
> > > > 1. Provide the missing information in the Packages.gz files
> > ^ about MD5 sums
> > > > anyway. Joerg, I have no idea how complex to implement
> > > > this might be or what chances to break something might
> > > > exist.
> > > > 2. We move English translations from Translation-en.bz2
> > > > to the packages table making sure that all existing UDD
> > > > applications will work immediately again.
> > > > 3. We drop long_description field from packages table now
> > > > and *calculate* the md5 sums from long_escription for those
> > > > releases where it is missing and keep all long_descriptions
> > > > inside the ddtp table.
> > >
> > > My feeling is that our long term aim should be to have the long description
> > > only in the ddtp table. This is a slightly-more-normalised form for the
> > > database which will help reduce the size of the tables and, since the long
> > > description is unused in most queries to UDD, that will help with
> > > performance. It's also a data structure that, in the long term, more closely
> > > reflects the data sources being included which has been a general UDD
> > > principle over the years.
> >
> > I perfectly agree here. This excludes option 2 which would have been
> > probably most easily to implement but I'm happy that at least one other
> > developer does not like this kind of quick workaround
>
> I think that it would be better to do (1) (that is, match what is being
> imported), and maybe provide a view that gathers all (english)
> descriptions for all releases.
I agree - lets hear what Joerg or whoever hava a say on this will say.
> > This somehow brings up a more general requirement: We need better
> > documentation what services are using UDD.
>
> Agreed. I've added to my TODO list to work on that, but don't expect
> anything happening soon (= if someone has time to work on that, please
> do).
What about this primitive start?
http://wiki.debian.org/UltimateDebianDatabase/UsedInDebianInfrastructure
(no idea why the name in "Subpages" link at
http://wiki.debian.org/UltimateDebianDatabase
is spelled that differently - may be somebody knows how to add some
remark like "add your project here" to this automatic link.)
Kind regards
Andreas.
--
http://fam-tille.de
Reply to: