Re: [Bug 634164] Re: Many useful packages are said "technical" and not displayed by default
> Adding "Enhances: totem" will *only* cause an "A totem plugin to watch > streams from arte.tv" checkbox to appear on the screen for totem. It > will not cause your package to appear by default when searching for > "arte". > > Conversely, adding a .desktop file will *only* cause your package to > appear by default when searching for "arte". It will not cause the > checkbox to appear on the screen for totem. > > So if you want both, do both. Thanks, it's clear now. > We already have an "advanced" department; we call it "System", and > totem-plugin-arte appears there right now. But you have made no mention > of it, and I don't think renaming it from "System" to "Advanced" would > make it more noticable. ;-) Maybe there is a misunderstanding here (sorry if it's me, English is not my mother tongue) I was talking about a separator in search results. Look at the current update-manager: all updates are displayed in the same list but with separators such as "Security updates", "Proposed updates" and other. In fact I only suggest to display something similar in the software-center search results area (for example when you just launch the software-center and type something in the search field). It could look (basically) like that: **Recommended applications** → (insert all current non-technical results in Maverick) **Advanced utilities** → (insert all other packages except *-dev/*-dbg/*-data/lib* and all other useless-alone/really-technical packages) and keep other packages hidden. (a click on "show technical packages" may append them at the end of the list under a "**Technical packages**" separator). Is my idea clearer now? > So, perhaps you could use this bug report to track your > changes to totem-plugin-arte (since the instructions are here), while we > open a separate bug report for the -dev/-dbg filter. Does that make > sense? Well, here I just wanted to use totem-plugin-arte as an example. I already opened a bug against app-install-data to add a .desktop file and I'm just waiting for a soon to be released new upstream (bugfix) version to add "Enhances: totem" to the package and then to push it in Maverick. So I don't really need a bug report to track this. But if you think that it makes more sense to open a new bug, then it's ok for me. I let you decide. -- Doesn't appear in search or in Totem's Add-ons section https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/634164 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
Re: [Bug 634164] Re: Many useful packages are said "technical" and not displayed by default
Thank you for your answer Matthew. > So there is a very easy way for you to help more people know that > totem-plugin-arte exists: mark it as "Enhances: totem". I will do this, however I'm sure totem-plugin-arte appeared on the totem add-ons list when I reported this bug. Perhaps it changed with the last software-center update? Otherwise, for example, is "Enhances: totem" sufficient for this package to be displayed by default (not being said "technical") when someone type "arte" in the search field? > In the particular case of watching Arte.tv, that is not (or should not be) a > technical task, but it's not an advanced task either. > So I don't think making a distinction between "technical" and "advanced" > would help us here. Of course you are right, but I wanted to say that this distinction can also be a partial workaround in such a case (even if it is said "advanced", the package is displayed by default in search results). But I really think this kind of distinction is important: experienced users will probably like it (no more Synaptic, so we have to take care of them too!) and even if beginners may not use utilities in this category, it's also important that they don't feel Ubuntu is limited. To sum-up my thought: display more search results by default with an advanced category == first time user say: "This Ubuntu thing is really good, I can do many advanced things with it if I want. But for now I will just install this non-advanced app." The best would be to only have "full working utilities/packages" in this category (eg. not all those *-data packages which are useless alone, but utilities such as "texlive", "man2html", "nethack-console" and so). All other packages may be considered "technical" and not be displayed by default in search results. As a first start, maybe just considering *-dev/*-dbg/*-data/lib* packages "technical" may be sufficient, usually it's just dependencies or you may use "apt-get buid-dep" or so. Do you see my point? -- Many useful packages are said "technical" and not displayed by default https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/634164 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
