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

Re: RFC: Keywords instead of Section

> However, "license:other" still doesn't serve any particular
> purpose.  I can always do without it by asking for packages that
> are
>     !license:gpl && !license:bsd && !license:prop
> or whatever I really want.  ':other' only has meaning relative to

You can do so, if you _know_ how to do that. But this is to help novice
users, which might not think of this possibility.
Basically license:non-free is some kind of "other", too, isn't it?

> the other keywords of that type; thus its meaning changes as
> keywords of that type are added.

Correct. Unfortunately, but i sometimes do see the need for this.

> I think we're understanding each other now.

Great. And it looks like we have the same goals, too ;)


> Wanna be on the Committee?

I don't have much time right now, so i probably won't help much with the
actual development (right now).

But i'd like to contribute of course.

We should ask freshmeat + sourceforge if we could get a dump of their
hierarchy structures (preferrably with some hit counts, so we can decide
where to subdivide further etc.?)

What do you think that the first step should be?
- Forming the keyword commitee, collecting keywords and starting to
  classify packages (i.e. writing an overrides file for apt-ftparchive?)
- do some user interface for this? (based on aptitude, which has already
  some kind of support?)
- pursue this discussion further and then contact debian-policy?


Reply to: