Re: New tags for biology and medicine.
On Tue, 4 Sep 2007, Steffen Moeller wrote:
clusters on DebTags technology. You certainly want to know _exactly_
what is installed on your cluster and do not really want it to be changed
by any change in the DebTags database. I think for this purpose the
meta package approach is the better way to go.
The debtags would be used as constraints: "I would allow the requested
installation of program X if there is a facet f such that f(X) is stated in
debtags and f is among a set of facets that characterise my cluster because I
say so.
You would _not_ use debtags to install every X with f(X) in debtags for some f
in F.
Hmmm, so I could undermine your cluster installation via removing or
changing some DebTags of packages you want to install? I can not
see the rationale behind it.
Hm. But you saw from Benjamin's reply that he found it not natural to have 3D
structures a separate facet, and I do not think we should spend much time on
such easy decisions: of course we need that, but how could Benjamin know?
Well, I don't know either why we really _need_ this. It might be of
some use perhaps but I fail to see an urgent need.
I am in favour of some decentral managing. The technology may be there to have
a shared maintainance but it would be less efficient and probably
consequently also less fun.
I'm personally very hesitant about any decentral thing because there is
always a danger that people who might care for this in the beginning will
find some new field of interest and we become dependant from some
decentral thing that requires extra maintainance.
We could have something like: categories with more than 5 entries get into the
main debtags distribution ... or something alike.
Well, probably we could convince DebTags people by just naming the
5+x entries that a catagorie makes sense without having an extra
repository.
Kind regards
Andreas.
--
http://fam-tille.de
Reply to: