http://wiki.debian.net/?spamInWikiPages
http://wiki.debian.net/?DealingWithSpam
After having read this - wouldn't it be easier to report the user doing
the spamming, and simply reverting all changes done by this user
(probably the users spamming will not have add valuable content)?
Who is in
Hello,
I think the idea is a good one - it might even work in practice :-).
I've tried a search starting with package, email and browser.
Package was a total failure (I wanted tools dealing with packages).
Try it now. The search was case-sensitive, now I have made it
insensitive.
Hello,
having used debtags-edit for real the first time today I've stumbled
over some issues.
Could someone please add a devel::modelling tag (for UML and
everything es out there)?
What is the meaning of
Tag: devel::editor
Description: Software development editor
Does
Hello
What is the meaning of
Tag: devel::editor
Description: Software development editor
Does this include everything used for editing in SW development? That
would equal to use::editing. Or does it work for source code editors
only (as opposed to e.g. UML editing).
Hello,
I've just added the content of Enrico's email Tips collected while
approving LOTS of tags from Oct. 28.
And the URL is: wiki.debian.org/DebTaggingGuidelines
Thanks for the setup
Ben
___
Debtags-devel mailing list
Hello,
What he was doing was searching the package name instead of keywords;
that would indeed match the package at least, bring the package's tags
in the 'Wanted' taglist and show other packages with same tags.
This sounds like what is referred to as related search to me (with a
distance of
PS: Maybe we should add faceted system to the mailing lists and all
posts should be tagged appropriately /joking.
Parse Error: Closing tag which was not opened at line 43
:-P
Ben
___
Debtags-devel mailing list
Hello
http://www.arches.uga.edu/~dripfeed/bookmarktags/
Cool. But the guy seems not to use use libtagcoll - I see no facets
there. Someone to convert :-)
Btw. yesterday I thought about a tagged filesystem. Not this database
stuff everyone is coming up with now. But wouldn't a real file system
Hello,
I think I've trouble with debtags again. Probably it is libapt-front. I
got the following unresolved symbol when dynamicall loading the
debtags-plugin for packagesearch:
Dynamic Library error: plugins/libdebtagsplugin.so: undefined symbol:
_Z13URItoFileNameSs
Any ideas?
Best regards Ben
Hello,
I have discovered, that people tagging their application still are not
doing well on agreeing on a common definition of the application and
utility tags.
Examples I was able to find in a short period of time, where I would
judge the packages similiar in their complexity, but tagged
Hello,
I'd rather go
Tag: devel::lang:ocaml
Description: Objective Caml Development
rather than
Description: OCaml Development
Searching tags for ocaml will still find it, because debtags
searches Tag: field as well as Description: field.
Any suggestion?
I'd say we go with the
Note that there was a discussion using debtags for license information
on debtags-devel/debian-legal.
http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2005/06/msg00016.html
is a good starting point.
Personally I believe, that if such an information should be available,
debtags is more suitable to express
Hello,
looks pretty cool. I'm looking forward to seeing the performance
improvments in the end user applications :-)
output18910ms 7740ms50ms
What does this output? Only the package names and the tags, or also the
package information?
Still to be done. It can be a good opportunity for revamping the
autotagger. Which in turn is an easy package to maintain if someone is
interested.
Does this include upstream maintenance?
Ben
___
Debtags-devel mailing list
Hello
Jesus Climent just proposed me a new facet for debian-specific tags,
such as package is debian native or package is orphaned. This would
be useful at least to Debian developers, and the orphaned part also to
others.
So, to start it can be like this:
Facet: debian
Description:
Hello,
1) take a list of packages
2) find 2 the best selections of tags A and B that approximate that
~50% of the packages have tag A and ~50% of the packages have tag B
3) present the user the choice Do you want A or B?
4) weed out the half of the list that the user doesn't want
The question is, if it is possible at all. Especially so, since every
package must be contained in at least A or B, being in both won't hurt
much, but being only in one would be bad.
The last part must read: but being in none would be bad.
Sorry for the confusion,
Ben
[past experience] One problem I had when I tried to use dbacl to review
tags is that in dbacl the size of the training data matters a lot. This
was a problem because the package data for {all packages with tag A} is
usually much smaller than the package data for {all packages without tag
Hello,
first of all, sorry for the late reply..
I'm studying informatics and for my thesis, I want to do research on
usability
of application installer user interfaces for Debian, targeted towards
non-expert users. My plan is to analyze current users' use of and
expectations for an
Hello,
do we need a use::comparing or use::diffing tag? I could find an
appropriate use tag for diff and friends.
Best regards
Ben
___
Debtags-devel mailing list
Debtags-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org
On Thu, 2006-11-02 at 21:15 +0100, Enrico Zini wrote:
Hello,
Exciting good news: http://www.iterating.org/ is providing a tag source
for software ratings!
Very cool, finally some nicely accessible rating :-) I need some time to
work on packagesearch!
What is the license of the data generated
Hello,
Anyway, this documentations seems to be a bit out of date: in my
understanding, the correct tag to tell a program is written in C is
implemented-in::c, and at least debtags-edit seems to agree with me.
Quoting Enrico's email from from july:
Begin
me and mornfall had a long
I'd love to see support for
experimental-only packages in the tagger, so that people can tag packages
there without needing to wait until they hit the wider audience of unstable.
Agreed.
We also need a way to tag packages in the process of packaging.
Otherwise we will never get people to tag
Tag: uitoolkit::xlib
Description: X library
Now things are getting insane, no offense :-)
We have four library tags already:
Tag: devel::library
Description: Libraries
Tag: role::devel-lib
Description: Development Library
Tag:
On Sun, 2006-12-03 at 19:44 +, Enrico Zini wrote:
On Sun, Dec 03, 2006 at 08:35:21PM +0100, Benjamin Mesing wrote:
We have four library tags already:
Tag: devel::library
Description: Libraries
Tag: role::devel-lib
Description: Development Library
Hello,
all statements made below represent my personal opinion, rather than
absolute answers. To keep answers short I spared the I believe..
phrases.
* gcc exists as a sort of escalator dependency package to keep
whatever-C-compiler-is-currently-default installed, but it isn't
empty - it
Hello,
here is an idea I came up with, when thinking about the discussion of
different tag sets for different releases (thanks Justin for bringing it
up!).
The idea is somewhat borrowed from versioned bugs. If a tag is added to
a package, the tag is submitted together with the version
Hello,
I believe it is past time to react to this proposal, we don't want to be
seen as some kind of black hole, everything that goes in never comes
out. And since I have some spare time at hand, I will make a start.
Generally speaking the proposed tags are relativly detailed. I believe
this
Hello
Thus we need to decide, if those details should become
part of the main vocabulary database.
Well, I don't think that we should make a harsh difference compared
to the main vocabulary database. Considering the effect of a less
fine grained tagging: People will be presented a list
On Thu, 2007-09-06 at 09:11 +0200, Andreas Tille wrote:
On Wed, 5 Sep 2007, Benjamin Mesing wrote:
We had a short discussion on IRC about your proposal, and as far as we
are concerned, Option 2. would be Ok for us (obviously Option 1. would
also be ok, since we wouldn't have anything
Hello,
On Thu, 2007-09-06 at 20:30 +0900, Charles Plessy wrote:
Dear all,
I was a bit lazily waiting for the conversation to settle before trying
to aswer :)
+Tag: field::biology:bioinformatics
+Tag: field::biology:molecular
+Tag: field::biology:structural
This is probably a
Hello,
today I have commit the tags based on the suggested patch provided by
the debian-med project.
The diff is appended at the end of the e-mail.
The changes should hit the main vocabulary in a day or two.
Regards Ben
Index: debian-packages
There are messages proposing many more tags, including a very long list
of suggestions i got from Justin at Debconf, that I still need to go
through. The process of adding tags might need some improvement. Would
it make sense to open a bug on the 'debtags' package for every single
one
Here's a simple patch which adds a description to use::checking. The
verb checking is a very vague verb and many activities could be
described as checking, but most of the packages I saw with this tag
fit a very specific concept. This is my attempt to put the concept
into words. Is this the
On Thu, 2008-01-10 at 11:32 +0100, Andrea Bolognani wrote:
I just noticed libglib2.0-0 is tagged with uitoolkit::gtk, and it doesn't
really make sense to me.
GLib is used by GTK+, but it doesn't make use of GTK+ itself, so I don't
think the tag is correct for this package.
You are absolutly
I note also that if I enter physics, I get field::physics and
implemented-in::fortran in the wanted section. I find this slightly
surprising.
I' believe Enrico has implemented some magic, that derives the tags
listed when searching the vocabulary (list of tags) by performing a full
text
Hello,
I am wondering what an x11::xserver is. Should xserver-xorg-video-* have
this tag? Should xserver-xorg-input-*?
Current state of tagging is inconsistent (e.g. -vesa has x11::xserver,
-nv does not).
Best regards
Ben
___
Debtags-devel
On Sun, 2009-05-03 at 12:27 +0100, Enrico Zini wrote:
On Sun, May 03, 2009 at 07:34:25AM +0200, Benjamin Mesing wrote:
I am wondering what an x11::xserver is. Should xserver-xorg-video-* have
this tag? Should xserver-xorg-input-*?
Current state of tagging is inconsistent (e.g. -vesa
I'd say that x11::xserver is a package providing an X server, that is,
something that X clients can connect to. I guess that covers whatever
gives us /usr/bin/X, xnest, xephyr and probably not many others.
Which would fail our minimum package count requirement for a tag.
However, for
If there are no objections in the next couple of days, I am going to
modify the vocabulary accordingly (i.e. x11::xserver gets the short
description X Server and Drivers, long description X servers and
drivers for the X server (input and video)) and perform the neccessary
tagging to reach a
Nice work :)
2010/2/13 Jesse Weinstein je...@wefu.org:
When you click on a second-level menu item, it turns bold, and a
third-level menu opens up, with the name, and a description (if there is
one). The bug happens when you then click on the third-level item.
With the first click, the
On Fri, 2010-02-26 at 16:00 -0300, Tássia Camões wrote:
2010/2/21 Benjamin Mesing bensm...@gmx.net:
Btw. I kinda like the idea of a close button (i.e. an [x]). Otherwise
there is no way to get a clean view of the facets after opening one
except for F5. Thought jumping to the top of the page
.
Can you give me a pointer to applications using xapian for debtags
without libept (is debtags already ported)? Are there any porting
hints available?
Best regards
Ben
On Sun, 2010-02-28 at 22:32 +, Enrico Zini wrote:
On Sun, Feb 28, 2010 at 09:48:48PM +0100, Benjamin Mesing wrote:
I
Hi,
while there is a point to the fact, that some facets could be more or less
covered by other facets (like office, which IMO is more like a purpose
classification), I think they still serve their purpose. I believe those facets
still describe a useful concept. Besides where would you draw
Hi Peter,
[Daniel Hartwig]
Computer science, perhaps with programming as a subfield. Do you have
some idea how many packages would use programming?
Should I do anything more than bringing it up on this list to get new
fields added?
No, that should be sufficient - please prod again, if
Hi,
as a semi-active member of the debtags project I am more involved in the
technical side. But generally I like your idea.
I would suggest to add those tags to the junior:: facet. I would also
suggest to limit the age-classification not to games but generally to
software targeted for kids
Hi,
I want to remove the tag suite::xmms from the vocabulary. It is only
used by a single package.
Can I simply remove the tag from the debtags-vocabulary/debian-package
file? What are the implication of such a removal, how will packages
still having this tag be handled?
Best regards
Ben
[forwarded on behalf of Simon Kainz si...@familiekainz.at]
Hello!
On at least
https://wiki.debian.org/Debtags
and
https://wiki.debian.org/Debtags/FAQ#What_is_Debtags.3F
the links to vocabulary ( http://debtags.alioth.debian.org/vocabulary
) are not working (= 404)
Just to let someone know.
[Forwarded on behalf of s3v c0llap...@yahoo.it - sorry for the delay]
Hi,
can you add a facet (role::firmware? hardware:firmware? Something
else?) for
tagging the firmware packages in free-non-free-contrib areas?
e.g.
$ debtags search role::firmware
atmel-firmware ..
bluez-firmware ..
Thanks for the hint, I have fixed the links to point to the up-to-date
vocabulary in SVN.
Best regards
Ben
On Thu, 2014-03-13 at 21:16 +0100, Benjamin Mesing wrote:
[forwarded on behalf of Simon Kainz si...@familiekainz.at]
Hello!
On at least
https://wiki.debian.org/Debtags
and
https
Hi,
I doubt debtags is a good way to locate firmware. :)
It may not be the best way to locate firmware, but debtags is one of the
main search interfaces to the user, and I consider it a valid use case
to search for firmware e.g. to get your hardware working.
I've taken the time to look at how
Hi Enrico,
today I wanted to update the tag vocabulary. When trying to update my
vocabulary I get:
svn up
Updating '.':
svn: E210002: Unable to connect to a repository at URL 'svn
+ssh://svn.debian.org/svn/debtags/vocabulary/trunk'
svn: E210002: To
Hi,
one thing that has always confused me is, that we have those two tags.
To me it seems that X11::application should be dropped in favour of
interface::x11.
Any objections? Could we autoapply packages interface::x11 with
X11::application.
Btw. at one point interface::X11 should be changed to
Hi Stéphane,
sorry for the delay. I have added implemented-in::pascal which should
become visible in the debtags editor in the next few days.
Best regards
Benjamin
---
Hello,
Can You add implemented-in::pascal tag please ?
All fp,
[@Enrico] Please reply to this message, the other was sent from the
wrong adress
I thought of a trick that can help with renaming tags:
1. Add the new tag to the vocabulary, wait a day for the site to pick
it up.
2. Add the new tag to all packages that have the old tag:
$ wget
Hi Laura,
One package is auralquiz which is a music quiz game that scans a users
selected folder of music and creates a quiz using the tags from the
audio files.
We couldn't find a suitable game::xxx tag, and we suggest game::quiz
I agree, that there is no suitable game tag, and probably
Hi Rob,
thanks for the information, you should probably file a bug against the
debtags-package.
Regards
Ben
On Sat, 2015-08-08 at 07:53 +1000, rob stone wrote:
Whilst updating (via synaptic) it fails to complete the installation of
debtags. If needed I could take a screen shot of the error
Ok, thanks. I will prepare an update of packagesearch.
Regards
Ben
On Sun, 2015-09-06 at 22:24 +0200, Enrico Zini wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 06, 2015 at 09:17:14PM +0200, Benjamin Mesing wrote:
>
> > libept-dev no longer contains the tcc-files (and therefore packagesearch
> > FTBS
58 matches
Mail list logo
