On 8/21/08, Xavier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Thu, Aug 21, 2008 at 10:45 AM, Ronald van Haren <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> I much prefer a new field to include categories/tags as I think it is >> more use friendly. Besides that people tend to forget things and start >> writing 'groups=(kde)' where groups=(category:kde) should have been. >> > > Even if we come to the agreement that a new field is better, what Nagy > said still holds. > Groups and categories are both some kind of tags to packages. > A huge part of their implementation will by consequent be the same and > should be shared. > So in my opinion, the brainstorming should go in that direction, to > find out if that is possible and how to do it. > _______________________________________________ > pacman-dev mailing list > [email protected] > http://archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/pacman-dev >
I suppose we could share a lot of the code with the groups field. I'm willing to look into it and start writing some new patches, but only after we come to an agreement that a new field is better. _______________________________________________ pacman-dev mailing list [email protected] http://archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/pacman-dev
