Which DebTag for Debian-Med ?

[Ben Armstrong]

On Mon, 8 Jan 2007 23:07:08 +0900
Charles Plessy <charles-debian-nospam at plessy.org> wrote:
> Thijs has a point: with the suite:: tags I just would like to transfer
> existing information in the debtags system. In the future, the
> information could flow in the opposite direction, but this is up to the
> people developing the CDD framework. (the metapackages of debian-med are
> Custom Debian Distribution metapackages).

I still think suite:: retains some usefulness in conjunction with field::, but perhaps I didn't make myself clear enough.  And perhaps also, everyone is so focused on debian-med's needs that we're not seeing the bigger picture: what do we do for CDDs in general?

It is possible that *any* arbitrary set of packages can be used to create a CDD.  The field:: tags are a nice way for debian-med to divide their whole CDD into related subsets, but for other CDDs (like Debian Jr.) field:: doesn't make sense.  All that a "suite::debian-med" designation would mean is "this package is in the Debian-med CDD".  Similarly "suite::debian-jr" would mean "this package is in the Debian Jr. CDD".  For a finer breakdown of what kind of package it is, see the other debtags for the package (in debian-med's case, field:: and works-with:: appear to be important, whereas for Debian Jr. use::, game::, etc. are more interesting).

Thoughts?  Improvements to this?  Rotten tomatoes?

Ben
--
 ,-.  nSLUG    http://www.nslug.ns.ca   synrg at sanctuary.nslug.ns.ca
 \`'  Debian   http://www.debian.org    synrg at debian.org
  `          [ gpg 395C F3A4 35D3 D247 1387 2D9E 5A94 F3CA 0B27 13C8 ]
             [ pgp 7F DA 09 4B BA 2C 0D E0 1B B1 31 ED C6 A9 39 4F ]