[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Tasks policy

On Mon, May 07, 2001 at 04:05:14PM -0400, Joey Hess wrote:
> I don't recall a discussion of or decision on using overrides files.

Well, uh, you were in it...

"Overrides files" may not be quite the most accurate way of expressing it.
Certainly, I don't mean overrides files that ftpmaster takes care of.

Unfortunately www.debian.org seems to be down, so I can't cite a url for
the discussion from a while ago, but the summary is basically that during
the freeze (ie, when I start removing packages left right and centre),
it's very easy for a task to get broken if task-membership is specified
as part of the task. If, instead, it's specified as part of the package
that's in the task, once the package is removed, the fact that it was
meant to be in the task disappears too, and fewer things break.

On the other hand, the way tasks currently work, with a single person
choosing which packages go in a task works fairly well (as you've said),
so that's something worth preserving. The way we can preserve that is
with override files.

> I also don't understand why this new Task: header is being introduced.

I'd encourage you to reread the thread from last year. I posted a URL
earlier in the thread.

> > 	* tasks should be priority optional (and thus packages in
> > 	  tasks should be priority optional),
> I think you mean the packages in a task should be option or higher (not
> extra), right?

Well, whatever. If they're standard or higher, they'll be installed
anyway, so it doesn't much matter. But yeah, that's all I was getting at.
It also brings into play the "don't Conflict: with other things" rules
from elsewhere.

> > 	* tasks should follow a naming convention so they can be organised
> > 	  better by tasksel. Probably:
> > 		task-devel-{c,c++,objc,haskell,...}
> > 		task-lang-{german,french,japanese,chinese,...}
> > 		task-server-{web,news,mail,database,dns,...}
> > 		task-user-{desktop,office,games,junior,...}
> > 		task-hware-{dialup,printer,laptop,...}
> Well we could let tasksel use the Section field, or some new field instead
> of re-overloading the package name. I think all those names are very, very
> ugly. Wouldn't this be nicer --
> Package: task-desktop
> Tasksel-Section: user
> Package: task-web-server
> Tasksel-Section: servers

Well, I mentioned somewhere having a separate section for tasks. We could
have more than one, and make it:

	Package: task-desktop
	Section: user-tasks

	Package: task-web-server
	Section: server-tasks

> Or even (why overload package the field at all) --

...because we're already doing it, and because it helps separate tasks
in existing UIs.

> Or even this (the only problem with it is that our current set of
> sections is so limited and hard to change) --

Sections are adminned by overrides by ftpmaster. There just needs a
good reason to create a new one (well, and some patience), it's not
really difficult.

> It's worth noting that for a good 3 or 4 months after potato's release,
> new installs that used tasksel did not get emacs or tex, or anything
> else in standard,

(Note that everyone who wanted TeX probably chose "task-tex" anyway)


Anthony Towns <aj@humbug.org.au> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/>
I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG signed mail preferred.

``_Any_ increase in interface difficulty, in exchange for a benefit you
  do not understand, cannot perceive, or don't care about, is too much.''
                      -- John S. Novak, III (The Humblest Man on the Net)

Attachment: pgpkd8xguAnMp.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: