A Dimecres 04 Juny 2008, Andreas Tille va escriure: > On Wed, 4 Jun 2008, Leopold Palomo-Avellaneda wrote: > > Well, we have: > > > > Task: > > Description: > > > > Recommends: > > Comment: > > Homepage: > > License: > > Responsible: > > Pkg-Description: > > > > and the idea is, from a very simple text file, using php, create some > > kind of nice html, no? > > > > So, a fast propose only thought 10 minutes: > > > > <Summary> the text to put on the left column. Explain the characteristic > > of the task. It's the abstract of the task. Links to the lists, > > explanation of the right column, etc. > > Currently the text on the left side on top you see short and long > description of the task and static text for explanation for all tasks. If > you want to propose a "Summary" you should propose which field of the text > file above you *exactly* want to get rendered there. > > > <Task> the name of the task > > > > <Description> the complete explanation of the task. > > Well, it is at the top of the left column - where is your problem. there's no problem. Left column -> abstract Right column -> complete description I'm lazy in this kind of things (also english is not my mother tangle) but there are people that like to explain a lot of things, history, etc. Maybe it could be interesting. > > > <Recommends> official package from debian. I would "pick" the information > > form http://packages.debian.org: homepage, description, etc. > > Nice - it is actually picked from this exact place. This is what we talk > about ... ok, perfect. > > <Comment> a comment of the package > > The comment is not displayed because it is just a comment for the > maintainer of the tasks files. well, I don't know if a "public" comment could be useful. I'm just putting the idea over the table. > > <package> name of the software recommended to package > > Well, the package name is given behind Depends/Recommends/Suggests - so we > need no extra field called "Package". umm, I think that I have not been clear. To me: Depends/Recommends/Suggests are packages already in debian. and package are software NOT in debian and proposed to package. That's the difference. > > <Pkg-Description> > > <Responsible> who is the "guilty" person of the recommend. > > <Comment> a comment about the package. > > <Homepage> > > <License> > > This exists - I don't know what you want to tell me. I'm doing a recompilation .... > > <sub-task> a specific sub task inside the task > > This does not exist and I just explained why. [...] > > Andreas, this is just a simple propose. I have added the <> to finish the > > tags in some way, because there are tags inside tags (as xml ...) > > Yes, I understand your proposal and I admit that the sub-tasks > hierarchy could be implemented better in XML because RFC822 is not > good for implementing a hierarchy. Ok, mmmmm we can repeat the same approach that with task. > > With this approach you could create a simple page, no directories, etc > > with sub task. The idea that I have in mind is that generic task has the > > common packages and the sub-task the specific packages. > > The real problem in your proposal is that you need somebody to do this. > I will not do it because I simply have no time for it. I'm working on > enhancing existing things which work perfectly for the current CDDs. If > you feel the need to implement something that works better for your > Robotics CDD you are perfectly welcome to enhance these tools and we > might think about adopting it for other CDDs if it has proven to work > better. I'm afraid you are trying to overdesign some simple tools before > you gathered real content that is handled by these tools. As I said > before: Once you have enough content for RObotics you can split of > from Debian Science and immediately create your own structure in a > Robotics CDD which at this point will probably become a one level > hierarchy again (most probably - at least this has shown my experience). > > So please accept that I will not change the tools that work currently > somehow and have several other problems to fix and do not need another > level of complexity as an extra burden. OK, firstly I thought having robotics in mid, but after I have thought that it could be useful for another cdd. Regards, Leo -- -- Linux User 152692 PGP: 0xF944807E Catalonia
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.