Re: [Mageia-dev] RPM groups policy
On 27/09/12 11:07, Pierre-Malo Deniélou wrote: Le 27/09/12 10:51,Pascal Terjan nous adresse ces quelques mots : On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 10:48 AM, Pierre-Malo Deniélou For PulseAudio, Sound/Mixer is fine. I don't agree If someone wants to install a mixer, pulesaudio in the list will probably confuse him As I was saying earlier, no group classification is perfect. In the situation you describe, having pulseaudio in System/Base would be even more confusing. But if you were to choose between Sound/Editors and Convertors, Sound/Midi, Sound/Mixers, Sound/Players, Sound/Utilities, Sound/Visualization, where would you look first? You know none fits perfectly, I know that as well, even less for pulseaudio-module-jack or pulseaudio-module-bluetooth. But before everyting was in Sound: so confusing is maximum. Now it becomes a bit (but only a bit) easier. That's the point. Or perhaps PA should just go in System/Base? No. It only drowns it in the crowd of completely unrelated packages. Do you expect someone to want to manually install pulseaudio after removing it, and search it in mixers? Yes. By the principle of "Where else?" :-) Cheers, Can it not stay in the top level "Sound" or does everything *have* to be in a sub group?
Re: [Mageia-dev] RPM groups policy
Le 27/09/12 10:51,Pascal Terjan nous adresse ces quelques mots : > On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 10:48 AM, Pierre-Malo Deniélou >> For PulseAudio, Sound/Mixer is fine. > > I don't agree > If someone wants to install a mixer, pulesaudio in the list will > probably confuse him As I was saying earlier, no group classification is perfect. In the situation you describe, having pulseaudio in System/Base would be even more confusing. But if you were to choose between Sound/Editors and Convertors, Sound/Midi, Sound/Mixers, Sound/Players, Sound/Utilities, Sound/Visualization, where would you look first? You know none fits perfectly, I know that as well, even less for pulseaudio-module-jack or pulseaudio-module-bluetooth. But before everyting was in Sound: so confusing is maximum. Now it becomes a bit (but only a bit) easier. That's the point. >>> Or perhaps PA should just go in System/Base? >> >> No. It only drowns it in the crowd of completely unrelated packages. > > Do you expect someone to want to manually install pulseaudio after > removing it, and search it in mixers? Yes. By the principle of "Where else?" :-) Cheers, -- Malo
Re: [Mageia-dev] RPM groups policy
On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 10:48 AM, Pierre-Malo Deniélou wrote: > Le 27/09/12 10:04,Colin Guthrie nous adresse ces quelques mots : >> Just ran into my first practical problem and would like your feedback. > > I'm guessing your email is just the first of a long list :-). > The new RPM group will indeed cause some head scratching for many packages. > >> PulseAudio packages used to just be in "Sound" group, but now I have to >> sub-categorise them as Sound/*. This is fine and I put everything in the >> Sound/Mixer category for now as this is one of the tasks PA does, mix >> your audio, but I get the feeling this group was more designed to >> represent graphical mixer UIs rather than infrastructure level stuff. > > RPM groups are for users, not necessarily technical users (technical > users already know which packages interest them). > So the main advice to find the category of a given package is: > > Where would it make sense for a user browsing through a list to find it? > > For PulseAudio, Sound/Mixer is fine. I don't agree If someone wants to install a mixer, pulesaudio in the list will probably confuse him >> Or perhaps PA should just go in System/Base? > > No. It only drowns it in the crowd of completely unrelated packages. Do you expect someone to want to manually install pulseaudio after removing it, and search it in mixers?
Re: [Mageia-dev] RPM groups policy
Le 27/09/12 10:04,Colin Guthrie nous adresse ces quelques mots : > Just ran into my first practical problem and would like your feedback. I'm guessing your email is just the first of a long list :-). The new RPM group will indeed cause some head scratching for many packages. > PulseAudio packages used to just be in "Sound" group, but now I have to > sub-categorise them as Sound/*. This is fine and I put everything in the > Sound/Mixer category for now as this is one of the tasks PA does, mix > your audio, but I get the feeling this group was more designed to > represent graphical mixer UIs rather than infrastructure level stuff. RPM groups are for users, not necessarily technical users (technical users already know which packages interest them). So the main advice to find the category of a given package is: Where would it make sense for a user browsing through a list to find it? For PulseAudio, Sound/Mixer is fine. > Should there be a group that represents this better? e.g. > > Sound/Plumbing > System/Sound > Plumbing/Sound Or Sound/PulseAudio ... :-P That's the Suse approach, but it does not work. It only multiplies the groups, with 3 or 4 subdivision depths (Amusements/Games/Strategy/Turn Based ...), with some groups only having a handful of packages. Many of the subdivisions make sense from a packaging point of view, but from a user point of view it makes browsing too precise. I personally think that groups are meant for the exploration by people who don't know what they are looking for. > Or perhaps PA should just go in System/Base? No. It only drowns it in the crowd of completely unrelated packages. > (I use the term Plumbing as this is quite common these days as an off > shoot perhaps from the Linux Plumbers Conference where the various > infrastructural bits of linux are discussed). > > Thoughts? No RPM group classification is perfect. There will always be a package that does not fit the classification. So we should stick to the "best guess" strategy for now. The new RPM group policy is not completely fixed, but I propose that everyone tries to stick with it until Beta 1, at which point we can review it and amend the most obvious problems. Cheers, -- Malo
Re: [Mageia-dev] RPM groups policy
'Twas brillig, and Pierre-Malo Deniélou at 25/09/12 23:43 did gyre and gimble: > Dear packagers, > > Tonight, following the packagers meeting, we agreed on a new RPM group > policy. > > The current policy is described at: > http://wiki.mageia.org/en/RPM_groups_policy > > The new policy is presented at: > http://wiki.mageia.org/en/Feature:RPMGroupRevamp > > This change in policy means that I will take the following actions by > the end of the week: > * update the wikipage http://wiki.mageia.org/en/RPM_groups_policy > * patch rpmlint to refuse new packages that do not follow the new > policy (I will send another email to -dev just before submitting > the new rpmlint). > * create a bug report tracking the packages that need to change group. > * mail -dev about the packages that are currently in wrong groups > (even with respect to the current policy) so that their maintainers > can take proper action within 2 weeks. After that, I will change > the groups myself > * mail -dev about the packages that are correct with respect to > current policy but need to be updated to respect the new policy. > For these packages, the deadline will be beta1 (12/12) to complete > the changes, which means that I will start doing the moves by > myself by Alpha 3 (06/11). > > I will mail -dev at each step on the way, so don't worry too much now. > > I hope the new RPM groups will make it easier for everyone to find > packages in rpmdrake and other tools. It will be a bit annoying for > every packager, but it's a good opportunity to revisit many package > specs before mga3 and make Mageia better. Just ran into my first practical problem and would like your feedback. PulseAudio packages used to just be in "Sound" group, but now I have to sub-categorise them as Sound/*. This is fine and I put everything in the Sound/Mixer category for now as this is one of the tasks PA does, mix your audio, but I get the feeling this group was more designed to represent graphical mixer UIs rather than infrastructure level stuff. Should there be a group that represents this better? e.g. Sound/Plumbing System/Sound Plumbing/Sound Or perhaps PA should just go in System/Base? (I use the term Plumbing as this is quite common these days as an off shoot perhaps from the Linux Plumbers Conference where the various infrastructural bits of linux are discussed). Thoughts? Col -- Colin Guthrie colin(at)mageia.org http://colin.guthr.ie/ Day Job: Tribalogic Limited http://www.tribalogic.net/ Open Source: Mageia Contributor http://www.mageia.org/ PulseAudio Hacker http://www.pulseaudio.org/ Trac Hacker http://trac.edgewall.org/
Re: [Mageia-dev] RPM groups policy
Le 26/09/12 22:58,Charles A Edwards nous adresse ces quelques mots : > On Thu, 27 Sep 2012 00:42:58 +0300 > Anssi Hannula wrote: > >>> Yes, but you will now be creating entries that Are Not >>> registered categories >> >> RPM groups are not related to menu categories in any way. > > > I know the the rpm group is different. > > Are you saying that No packager will try to create or change > a menu entry to reflect the new rpm groups? Exactly. > Example: > 'Alien arena' in Games/Shooter instead of Games/Other The RPM group of Alien arena will change to Games/Shooter, but its desktop file is not supposed to change. I understand your point, but there will always be mismatches between the two categories, since the two purposes are different. -- Malo
Re: [Mageia-dev] RPM groups policy
On Thu, 27 Sep 2012 00:42:58 +0300 Anssi Hannula wrote: > > Yes, but you will now be creating entries that Are Not > > registered categories > > RPM groups are not related to menu categories in any way. I know the the rpm group is different. Are you saying that No packager will try to create or change a menu entry to reflect the new rpm groups? Example: 'Alien arena' in Games/Shooter instead of Games/Other Charles -- Gathering threads always break in the middle -- Murphy's Laws of Sewing n°18 -- Mageia release 3 (Cauldron) for x86_64$ On SuperSizehttp://www.eslrahc.com Registered Linux user #182463 3.5.4-tmb-server-1.mga3 x86_64 -- signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [Mageia-dev] RPM groups policy
Le 26/09/12 22:42,Anssi Hannula nous adresse ces quelques mots : > 27.09.2012 00:27, Charles A Edwards kirjoitti: >> On Wed, 26 Sep 2012 22:17:29 +0100 >> Pierre-Malo Deniélou wrote: >> > The current policy is described at: > http://wiki.mageia.org/en/RPM_groups_policy > > The new policy is presented at: > http://wiki.mageia.org/en/Feature:RPMGroupRevamp What about xdg menu compliance? >>> >>> There is already a policy in place, and automated checks that enforce >>> it. Everyone seems happy with it, so it does not change :-). >> >> Yes, but you will now be creating entries that Are Not >> registered categories > > RPM groups are not related to menu categories in any way. The RPM groups are seen only in rpmdrake (and smart and Mageia App Db), as far as I understand. And they are package-based. .desktop files (which are for menu entries) are for the desktop applications. So one package can have several .desktop files (for each application it contains) or none. They are in effect unrelated. There was however a proposal to base the new RPM groups on the freedektop standard for menu classification, but it seems not to be a possibility (mainly because packages <> applications). Cheers, -- Malo
Re: [Mageia-dev] RPM groups policy
On Wednesday 26 September 2012 23:27, Charles A Edwards wrote: > Yes, but you will now be creating entries that Are Not > registered categories > > http://standards.freedesktop.org/menu-spec/menu-spec-1.0.html#category-registry Perhaps I'm slow, but I thought there was a difference between RPM groups and desktop menu groups. So this shouldn't be an issiue. -- Johnny A. Solbu PGP key ID: 0xFA687324 signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: [Mageia-dev] RPM groups policy
27.09.2012 00:27, Charles A Edwards kirjoitti: > On Wed, 26 Sep 2012 22:17:29 +0100 > Pierre-Malo Deniélou wrote: > The current policy is described at: http://wiki.mageia.org/en/RPM_groups_policy The new policy is presented at: http://wiki.mageia.org/en/Feature:RPMGroupRevamp >>> >>> >>> What about xdg menu compliance? >> >> There is already a policy in place, and automated checks that enforce >> it. Everyone seems happy with it, so it does not change :-). > > Yes, but you will now be creating entries that Are Not > registered categories RPM groups are not related to menu categories in any way. -- Anssi Hannula
Re: [Mageia-dev] RPM groups policy
On Wed, 26 Sep 2012 22:17:29 +0100 Pierre-Malo Deniélou wrote: > >> The current policy is described at: > >> http://wiki.mageia.org/en/RPM_groups_policy > >> > >> The new policy is presented at: > >> http://wiki.mageia.org/en/Feature:RPMGroupRevamp > > > > > > What about xdg menu compliance? > > There is already a policy in place, and automated checks that enforce > it. Everyone seems happy with it, so it does not change :-). Yes, but you will now be creating entries that Are Not registered categories http://standards.freedesktop.org/menu-spec/menu-spec-1.0.html#category-registry Charles -- I have no doubt that it is a part of the destiny of the human race, in its gradual improvement, to leave off eating animals. -- Thoreau -- Mageia release 3 (Cauldron) for x86_64$ On SuperSizehttp://www.eslrahc.com Registered Linux user #182463 3.5.4-tmb-server-1.mga3 x86_64 -- signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [Mageia-dev] RPM groups policy
Le 26/09/12 22:09,Charles A Edwards nous adresse ces quelques mots : > On Tue, 25 Sep 2012 23:43:50 +0100 > Pierre-Malo Deniélou wrote: > >> Tonight, following the packagers meeting, we agreed on a new RPM group >> policy. >> >> The current policy is described at: >> http://wiki.mageia.org/en/RPM_groups_policy >> >> The new policy is presented at: >> http://wiki.mageia.org/en/Feature:RPMGroupRevamp > > > What about xdg menu compliance? There is already a policy in place, and automated checks that enforce it. Everyone seems happy with it, so it does not change :-). https://wiki.mageia.org/en/Packaging_guidelines#Desktop_files However, if you feel that some packages are in the wrong menu category, it's a bug that you should report. Cheers, -- Malo
Re: [Mageia-dev] RPM groups policy
On Tue, 25 Sep 2012 23:43:50 +0100 Pierre-Malo Deniélou wrote: > Tonight, following the packagers meeting, we agreed on a new RPM group > policy. > > The current policy is described at: > http://wiki.mageia.org/en/RPM_groups_policy > > The new policy is presented at: > http://wiki.mageia.org/en/Feature:RPMGroupRevamp What about xdg menu compliance? Charles -- Yow! I want to mail a bronzed artichoke to Nicaragua! -- Mageia release 3 (Cauldron) for x86_64$ On SuperSizehttp://www.eslrahc.com Registered Linux user #182463 3.5.4-tmb-server-1.mga3 x86_64 -- signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [Mageia-dev] RPM groups policy
On Tue, 25 Sep 2012, Pierre-Malo Deniélou wrote: > Dear packagers, > > Tonight, following the packagers meeting, we agreed on a new RPM group > policy. > > The current policy is described at: > http://wiki.mageia.org/en/RPM_groups_policy > > The new policy is presented at: > http://wiki.mageia.org/en/Feature:RPMGroupRevamp > > This change in policy means that I will take the following actions by > the end of the week: > * update the wikipage http://wiki.mageia.org/en/RPM_groups_policy > * patch rpmlint to refuse new packages that do not follow the new > policy (I will send another email to -dev just before submitting > the new rpmlint). On build system, we also need to update youri to use the old rpmlint config for already released distributions.
[Mageia-dev] RPM groups policy
Dear packagers, Tonight, following the packagers meeting, we agreed on a new RPM group policy. The current policy is described at: http://wiki.mageia.org/en/RPM_groups_policy The new policy is presented at: http://wiki.mageia.org/en/Feature:RPMGroupRevamp This change in policy means that I will take the following actions by the end of the week: * update the wikipage http://wiki.mageia.org/en/RPM_groups_policy * patch rpmlint to refuse new packages that do not follow the new policy (I will send another email to -dev just before submitting the new rpmlint). * create a bug report tracking the packages that need to change group. * mail -dev about the packages that are currently in wrong groups (even with respect to the current policy) so that their maintainers can take proper action within 2 weeks. After that, I will change the groups myself * mail -dev about the packages that are correct with respect to current policy but need to be updated to respect the new policy. For these packages, the deadline will be beta1 (12/12) to complete the changes, which means that I will start doing the moves by myself by Alpha 3 (06/11). I will mail -dev at each step on the way, so don't worry too much now. I hope the new RPM groups will make it easier for everyone to find packages in rpmdrake and other tools. It will be a bit annoying for every packager, but it's a good opportunity to revisit many package specs before mga3 and make Mageia better. Cheers, -- Malo
