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

Re: Where are tasks now and how are they handled?

Javier Fernández-Sanguino Peña wrote:
> There are three contradictory views:
> - Aj[1] said a while back that this is managed by override files in 
> the archive (this was probably only a temporary fix). Some other
> developers at debian-devel say this is still being done.
> - tasksel sources  include (under tasks/) a list of tasks with their
> descriptions and packages.
> - latest debian-policy says this is done using a Task: control field in
> the packages:
> from the changelog:
>   * we no longer have task packages, instead, we define tasks using a
>     special field in the control file (and these should be added only
>     after discussion on the mailing lists) closes:Bug#97755
> This Task: field is used by debian-cd to retrieve a list of tasks, as
> infered from its sources.
> 	Which one is right? (it's a bit confusion). Some DD's are telling
> me to file a bug against tasksel if I want to modify "Task: spanish"
> whileas this seems to contradict debian-policy (??)
> 	Maybe the debian-policy document should clear up this issue, and
> probably, say that the others (if any) are deprecated.

The only contradicory item is policy's changelog, which is hardly
authoratative. The policy document no longer has anything to say about
task packages.

The canoical source of the task information is tasksel's source; this
information is extracted by some program of aj's to generate the
overrides file. That in turn is used to populate Packages files, which
are then seen by tasksel and aptitude.

This is not a temporary thing, this is how it is designed to work.
Experience with the old task system has shown that task membership
information is best maintained centrally by a small group who have a
coherent view of the purpose of each task, and who can make hard
decisions. Currently that group consists of myself, Randolph Chung, and

see shy jo

Attachment: pgpO5ZFs_gym9.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: