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

Re: Working on the tasks pages

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.


firstly I thought having robotics in mid, but after I have thought that it 
could be useful for another cdd.



Linux User 152692
PGP: 0xF944807E

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Reply to: