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

Re: New task: psychology; new tasks pages

On Tue, Jun 09, 2009 at 05:26:43PM -0400, Yaroslav Halchenko wrote:
> Although recently we had an adjoint vacation with Michael for a  week,
> most often we watch each other's back while the other one is away ;)
> But thanks for the invitation -- it might come handy.

Whatever you do - it is your choice.  Just know that you are
welcome here.
> I would second Michaels opinion that psychology is more related to
> the science, whenever Psychiatry probably to the debian-med;  and pyepl
> and psychopy has little to do with psychiatry (although who knows).
> Nevertheless, those 2 packages, might be used in
> various fields of medicine, from therapy to stimuli delivery for
> pre-surgical planning, and once again having nothing to do with
> Psychology per se.
> To summarize, I would recommend to rename the section into something
> more along those lines: may be "Stimuli Delivery" ?
> seems to be broad enough with a nice specificity ;)

The problem I have with such specific tasks names is that we
might end up with so many tasks as we might have packages.  If
you look at the existing tasks they are quite wide to enable
putting a real set of packages into it.  The only task which
might be up for discussion to be more fine grained is biology:
it absorbed so many packages that a split might make sense -
but we do not really have a clue how to reasonably do this.

I also would like to find task names which immediately make sense
to the user without forcing him to read the description.  This
works for "Psycholgy" but does not work for "Stimuli Delivery".
At least everybody *thinks* to know what Psychology means (even
if you as the expert might disagree).

So I would vote for keeping the name "Psychology" for the task an
summarise Michaels and your input in the description of the task
to tell the user what part of Psychology is actually covered here.
I personally feel not really competent to find a proper wording for
such a description.
> yeay! thank you all guys back! What unfortunate project Debian would be
> if there were no Debian Med, Exppsy, Science, etc? ;)


Kind regards



Reply to: