Debian Multimedia Blend (Was: Defining interesting multimedia tasks)

[Jonas Smedegaard]

On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 02:16:12PM -0300, Felipe Sateler wrote:
>On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 04:51, Andreas Tille <andreas at an3as.eu> wrote:
>>  1. Mailing list
>>     I suggested to use debian-multimedia at lists.debian.org as general 
>>     discussion list (for instance for discussion like this) for a 
>>     Debian Multimedia Blend and for an entry point of users to talk 
>>     to the package developers.  This list has turned out to be a good 
>>     success in other Blends.
>>     The reason to not to do so was that this list is used as 
>>     packaging list of DeMudi packages.
>>       List Archive of August: 8 mails
>>       List Archive of September: 1 SPAM mail
>>       List Archive of October: 1 mail
>>     In short: The mailing list is de facto free and really using it
>>     might be a way to actively be notified about packages which are 
>>     not yet moved under pkg-multimedia-maintainers maintenance.
>
>So far Jonas is (I believe) the only one who opposes this split. I'm in 
>favor, and if we do this we should announce it to devel-announce and 
>-announce so that we can get some users there. What do others think?

Hmm.  Now that I reflect on it again, I am not so strongly against it, 
actually.  I see the point of better serving our users, but cannot help 
being sceptical still - so please help convince me:

Bugreports have been mentioned as an example of inappropriate mails for 
such list, right? So what is then on-topic?  Is it for visions and 
metadesign - like a multimedia-specific d-project@ ?  Or is it more of a 
d-user-multimedia@ list?

When we (apparently) lack the time already to do the technical work we 
would like to, then where should the ressources come from to manage and 
care for such a list?  Or do we simply provide the space and leave the 
Multimedia users to discuss with themselves?


>>  5. Debtags
>>     The DebTags technique should be used more heavily in Blends (see 
>>     for instance [9]).  I do not mind what comes first:  Designing 
>>     Debtags for multimedia packages and proper debtagging for *all* 
>>     relevant packages or defining tasks, putting the packages in and 
>>     use the tasks pages for enabling proper DebTagging.  IMHO the 
>>     latter approach is more simple and can be easier done.  Once the 
>>     DebTagging is done properly we might be able to decide about 
>>     means how to create tasks from DebTags.  In any case we have to 
>>     *do* something - nothing comes from sit and wait.
>
>I don't really care much about debtags. They are inconsistent, little 
>used and even less policed.

I am a debtags fan.  Time will tell if I manage to back that up with 
action.  Exactly because it is (deliberately) vaguely policed, I guess 
there's no need for consensus on its use - those of us believing in its 
potential can simply start tagging to improve its usability :-)

Anyone interested but uncertain where to begin, please speak up, and I'd 
be happy to try explain how it works.

NB! There is absolutely no need to be a programmer or a Debian Developer 
to help improve debtags tagging!



Regards,

  - Jonas

-- 
  * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt
  * Tlf.: +45 40843136  Website: http://dr.jones.dk/

  [x] quote me freely  [ ] ask before reusing  [ ] keep private
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-multimedia-maintainers/attachments/20101021/9081b200/attachment.pgp>