Re: GSoC status: final summary and comments
On Sat, Aug 23, 2008 at 03:25:24PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Jordà Polo <jorda@ettin.org> writes:
> > Other than that, there are still a few things, such as the Source/Ref
> > field, that could benefit from more discussion here in the list. If the
> > classification for tags without Ref[4] is to be used, how should it
> > compare to tags with Ref? Treat keywords as if they were "manuals"?
>
> That at least was what I had in the back of my mind.
Then manpages and URLs probably need be classified too, which makes
sense. But how about manuals that are seldom referenced? Where do we
draw the line? This is the number of references for each manual:
215 policy
27 devref
18 doc-base
13 fhs
13 menu
4 debconf-spec
4 menu-policy
4 perl-policy
2 python-policy
1 libpkg-guide
1 lintian
The first five manuals probably deserve to be identified as a "source",
but I'm not so sure about manuals with 4 or less references.
> > Also, how do you think --tags should interact with other options such as
> > --display-level? If it makes sense to use both options at the same time,
> > what should be the behaviour, display tags as an AND of all options? Or
> > does an OR make more sense?
>
> I agree with Frank here. AND makes the most sense to me.
OK, good. Forgot to say that that is what is currently implemented.
Reply to: