Re: Announcing Debian Package Tags
On Thu, May 01, 2003 at 03:10:54PM -0500, Joshua Haberman wrote:
> * Steve Greenland (email@example.com) wrote:
> > On 30-Apr-03, 17:47 (CDT), Jacob Hall?n <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> > > Other usefulpackage tags would be source language (C, C++, Python,
> > > Perl, Ruby etc.)
> > Why? If the package performs the functionality requested, why should you
> > care what the source language is?
> Is it a problem to have too much information (within reason)?
Well, it makes it more complicated for the taggers if they have to tag what
language it is written in besides what languages are required/optional for
its use, and depending on the interface also may make it more complicted
for the user, having two C++ sections, one for packages requiring C++ to
use them (e.g. libraries, or a C++ class browser perhaps), and another for
packages unrelated to C++ that happen to be written in C++.
> If someone was planning to write a GNOME application in Python, they
> might want to see examples of existing software using this combination.
This sort of thing should already be possible (albeit maybe not
user-friendly, but then we're talking about developers here) using
build-depends. Build-depends won't tell you what language is used if that
language is supported in build-essential, but it ought to be possible to
look at reverse-build-depends on a package (e.g. the GNOME python
bindings). Caveat: I have no idea how much work would be required to look
at a reverse-build-depends.