Hey, On 13/08/2008, at 8:01 AM, Stephen Hahn wrote:
> > I've been warming up to a couple of modifications to package > naming--in particular, I want to make it easier to publish outside of > the shared namespace. Before pursuing that, I had a couple of > questions about package classification schemes. If you remember, in > > http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/pkg-discuss/2008-June/004083.html > > I made reference to the freedesktop.org classification scheme > > http://standards.freedesktop.org/menu-spec/latest/apa.html > > via the info.classification property > > set name=info.classification value=freedesktop.org:Development/IDE Just as an update on this (which you're already aware of), I've been trying to use the freedesktop.org menu spec for some of the SFE packages. While it's perfect for stuff that's likely to go into a graphical menu, it's obviously lacking for libraries. One possible classification could be using the RPM group scheme, as defined by Red Hat - http://www.gnome.org/~gman/rpm_groups_redhat.txt but (more usefully IMO) extended by Mandriva http://wiki.mandriva.com/en/Development/Packaging/Groups http://cvs.mandriva.com/cgi-bin/viewvc.cgi/SPECS/ is useful (search for *.spec within the sub-directories), so you can see what classification is applied to different types of software Would classifications be additive? Where would you use one and not the other? Is there a greater level of burden in ensuring IPS packages are correctly classified for multiple classifications? Glynn _______________________________________________ pkg-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-discuss
