Hi,
On Fri, Aug 21, 2015 at 8:25 PM, Andreas Tille <
andreas@an3as.eu> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On Fri, Aug 21, 2015 at 08:11:15PM +0530, Akshita Jha wrote:
> >
> > There are prospective packages like
> > 'fsa' which are already in udd and additional information like "Enhances"
> > and "Remark" are missing for these packages.
>
> the table with the current prospective packages needs some extra columns
> and the extra information needs to completed from the tasks file.
>
> > Also, certain prospective packages like "modeller" are present in task
> > files but not in udd. Do we need to insert all the information (homepage,
> > url, remark, description) for such packages also to udd ?
>
> Yes, these are the packages collored in red which we have no other base
> of information than the tasks file and we need to create the full record
> from here.
>
I have studied the details of prospective packages in tasks pages. I think it is better to add prospective packages which are not in udd yet to the already existing "blends_prospectivepackages" table than creating a separate table for them. Logically, all these are prospective packages and all such packages should be kept in a single table. Does this seem good? And, I'll definitely keep in mind all the points you've mentioned in your previous mail [0]
To enhance blends_prospectivepackages - the following extra columns need to be added:
-> pkg-url
-> remark
-> language
-> note
-> enhances
-> X-category
-> X-Importance
After adding the above column, the information of prospective packages already in udd can be enhanced and new prospective packages can be added to the same table.
That said, I feel most of these columns will remain empty as the information above is not specified for all prospective packages. Will this be a problem ? Do you think all this information will be made available for all packages in the long run ?
Also, how do I go about altering the table ? Should I make changes to sql/upgrade.sql ?