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

Re: Categorization of packages (was Re: Aptitude, ARs)

On Fri, Mar 14, 2003 at 05:36:53AM +0100, Michael Banck <mbanck@debian.org> was heard to say:
> > Currently, about 2/3 of packages are properly assigned in "new
> > Categorical Browser".  
> OK, I tried it out today. AFAICT, the new categorical browser (NCB) is a
> different view of the packages. I.e., you lose all the nice 'New
> Packages', 'Installed Packages' etc. and instead have a flat categorical
> view. And I've found no way to go back to the main categorical view,
> hitting 'q' results in exiting the NCB. 
> It would be much more sensible to just replace the Sections in the
> normal view by categories (making it a 'UI options'). Or did I miss
> anything? Is there a chance this will be changed before sarge? Otherwise
> its usefulness is limited I'm afraid.

  The browse mode is a bit of an experiment -- my feeling was that it
was somewhat easier to navigate (when you were working with categories)
than the standard hierarchy.  You can adjust the grouping policy of the
main view to include categories by typing "G" and replacing the two
section(...) invocations with "hier".

  Oh -- I just figured out what you mean about hitting "q".  The browser
was set up to use "left" to go "back" and "right" to go forwards.

  Anyway, the navigation style in the browser is somewhat buggy and
experimental (as opposed to the underlying hierarchy code, which works
fine AFAIK)

> Well, this needs manpower. Fortunately, it does not need l33t C++
> hacking skills, so we could probably get some volunteers quickly if we
> motivate them.


> BUT: We should NOW decide on a new Category-Policy. At least the
> following points should be discussed before we even waste our time with
> implementing them in aptitude, let alone trying to do them for dselect
> or policy:
> (For everybody interested in the NCB structure, but unwilling to
> install/firing up aptitude now, check this out for the same data:
> http://people.debian.org/~erich/packagebrowser )
> 1. Seems like Daniel more or less retained the old Sections as first
>    level categories. Do we want to go a step further? 
> I feel that it might be easy to just modify the Section:-field policy so
> it says that there can be one or more Sections (like Depends:), with a
> syntax like: "Section: mail/client, desktop/gnome". That way, the other
> frontends might be quite easy to change to at least not choke on the new
> layout, as long as the first word is out of one of the old sections.
> OTOH, now is the time and chance to really think up a new layout, so why
> don't we do it right?

  That might be a good idea; there's some cruft in the list of toplevel

> 3. Can a package be in more than one Category? 
> Currently, about 10% of the packages categorized seem to be in more than
> one section. I still think it might be worth having e.g. GNOME packages 
> be categorized both as desktop/gnome and foo/bar.

  Obviously, I think this is a good idea :)

> > I also see great possibility for aptitude's 'l' command which enables us
> > to limit scope of package displayed based on some rules.
> Ehm, when I hit 'l' I get:
> |Enter the new package tree limit:
> |!~v
> Without a 'Help' Button. Doesn't look very intuitive for me.

  I never claimed it was intuitive. :P


/-------------------- Daniel Burrows <dburrows@debian.org> -------------------\
|           Almost Winter, Winter, Still Winter, and Construction.            |
\---- Be like the kid in the movie!  Play chess! -- http://www.uschess.org ---/

Reply to: