Announcement of new packagebrowser?

[Erich Schubert]

> I can't see of a tag like "specialized" can be assigned in an objective
> way: I consider every law-related stuff as "specialized" stuff, while a
> lawyer can consider law-related stuff as "essential" and C++ compilers
> as "specialized" indeed.
>=20
> However, if you come out with some objective definition of
> "specialized", I'd be more than happy to see that tag in the regular
> vocabulary.

"specialized" is a "modifying" tag. It should be added when a package is
more specialized than the others with the same tags. So you only apply
it to one "C++ compiler" when comparing it with other "C++ compilers".

> I do not see the problem if we keep desktop suites and toolkits
> separated: since those applications are not part of gnome, they won't
> have the desktop::gnome tag; however, they would still be standalone
> applications, and they can have the desktop::standalone tag.  They can
> also have the toolkit::gtk tag, because they are indeed based on Gtk.

The problem is that people looking for applicaitons for their gnome
desktop will morelikely miss the GTK apps - which would probably fit
just perfectly into their GNOME desktop.
I dislike this separation from a user point of view.

> > We could also need some "ui::graphical" (or ui::x11?) tag that allows=
 to
> > remove text mode programs from the selection.
>=20
> What about an explicit ui::text or ui::term instead?

We don't have negative selections in the UserInterface yet, and it makes
the UserInterface more complicated to do so i fear.
Well, hopefully the grouping will suffice.

Greetings,
Erich Schubert
--=20
    erich@(vitavonni.de|debian.org)    --    GPG Key ID: 4B3A135C    (o_
  A polar bear is a rectangular bear after a coordinate transform.   //\
        Gl=FCck gleicht durch H=F6he aus, was ihm an L=E4nge fehlt.      =
  V_/_
                        --- Robert Lee Frost