Re: RFC: Keywords instead of Section
> A good solution is explicitly to _type_ the keywords. Dividing
> keywords up into groups of the same type is very a useful way
> of keeping the system orderly.
The main problem I have had with trying to do this is that
it is often not obvious which "type" a keyword really is.
The ability I built into my system to merge multiple files
was meant to somewhat address this (the idea is that each
file categorizes based on a different criterion, and when
multiple such files are available, each one can be put into
a separate tree (not yet implemented, although it shouldn't
However, an explicit "type" might be nice. I await your
patch ...... or at least, I will once my new power supply
gets here :-P
> (However, we must absolutely
> not have a type called 'other' !!!)
If you think a "miscellaneous" category is not necessary,
you have not tried to categorize our packages. There are
packages which truly defy categorization, and "misc" is
better than having a separate "section" for every offbeat
package out there.
> I would suggest that instead of re-inventing the wheel, we
> simply adapt the SourceForge/Freshmeat system for our own use.
The code should be general. Whoever categorizes the
packages is free to do whatever they want, but the code
shouldn't lock us into a particular categorization scheme.
Also, I'm skeptical about the Freshmeat system (aside from
searching, I've never been able to find anything with it)