Calendar management-related tags

Hello,

I think it would be useful to define the following tags:
    works-with::calendar            calendar data
    works-with-format::icalendar    iCalendar (RFC 5545)
    protocol::webcal                WebCAL, that iCalender exposed by
                                    HTTP
    protocol::caldav                CalDAV (RFC 4791)

Indeed, I think the only related tag, use::timekeeping, is far from
being useful enough when searching for a software. For instance, a
common requirement would be to be able to import iCalendar files.
Someone using a remote calendar server would also want a CalDAV support,
etc.

By the way, the rationale for having protocol::webcal and
protocol::caldav instead of simply protocol::http is that these are two
HTTP-based protocols that are quite different, and often used for
distinct purposes.

Regards,

--

-- 
 ,--.
: /` )   Tanguy Ortolo <xmpp:tanguy <at> ortolo.eu> <irc://irc.oftc.net/Tanguy>
| `-'    Debian Developer
 \_

Re: Bad link on debtags.alioth.debian.org?

On Thu, Feb 23, 2012 at 11:30:21AM +0100, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:

> <URL: http://debtags.debian.net/reports/pkginfo/stopmotion > links to
> <URL: http://debtags.alioth.debian.org/edit.html?pkg=stopmotion > which
> report that "This page has been moved to
> http://debtags.debian.net/edit/". and try to send me to
> <URL: http://debtags.debian.net/edit/ >.
> 
> Should the pkginfo URL be changed?

Thanks! Fixed.

Ciao,

Enrico

--

-- 
GPG key: 4096R/E7AD5568 2009-05-08 Enrico Zini <enrico <at> enricozini.org>

Re: A tag for video camera and microphone?

On Wed, Feb 22, 2012 at 10:26:03AM +0100, Tanguy Ortolo wrote:

[quoting in full because the original message did not reach the list due
 to list configuration; Tanguy's email now added to email whitelist]

> While looking for a Jabber client with audio/video support, I thought it
> might be useful to have a facet to describe video cameras (aka webcams)
> and microphones, like hardware::camera for still image cameras.
> 
> Perhaps something like hardware::videocamera and hardware::microphone?
> The existing tags works-with::video and works-with::audio are also
> relevant for videoconferencing software, I think. And perhaps
> hardware::video, but I am not sure, since this one seems to designate
> graphic output rather than input.

You are right, I just noticed that the current hardware::camera is more
for things like gphoto which can interface with digital cameras and
download photos, and we don't have a tag for webcams.

OTOH, hardware::camera is currently used to tag both kamera and
gtkam, and webcamd and cheese. So we might be looking at splitting the
existing tag in two.

hardware::video is for graphic card drivers and utilities, so I agree
with you, it doesn't fit.

We could split hardware::camera in hardware::digicam (making it explicit
what it is for) and hardware::videocamera or, probably better,
hardware::webcam? hardware::videocamera looks more like something to
control expensive video cameras via Firewire connections for the Debian

Tags for region and translation status?

Hi,

when discussing about how to classify software better two ideas came
up and I would like to ask for you opinions about them.

One is to have a "region::" tag that would include the rfc3166
regions. The meaning would be something like "useful mainly in this
region". This could be e.g. a german tax application that is specific
to the german tax law. Or a IM client that is used 99% in china. Or a
english train table travel planer. The use-case would be that e.g. in
software-center there would be a gentle warning that the app may not
be useful in your current region. It could also be used to alter
search results (e.g. region::cn and searching for IM). I know there is
the culture:: tag, but it seems to not quite match the above plus its
not granular enough for e.g. the tax application use-case (as
culture::german is too broad and includes other german speaking
countries with different tax laws).

The other one (probably more controversial as this will clutter the
Tags file a lot) is to include a translated::$lang tag when there is a
translation for the app (or when more than e.g. 80% are
translated). This would be useful to e.g. hide (or warn about)
untranslated apps for the current users language. I'm not 100%
convinced about this one myself as it will potentially increase the
size of the tags quite a bit (but I guess I should actually measure
this). But I would really like the feature :)

If there is approval about the idea I'm happy to implement a client
lib/command similar to the new debtagshw/debtags-hardware work.

please add "devel::lang:vala" tag

Hi,

IMHO all vala development related tools should be tagged as
"devel::lang:vala", but there is no such tag yet. Can you
add it please?

-- Sebastian

Added new system::* debtags facet

Hello,

I have finally added the new system::* facet to the Debtags vocabulary:
http://debtags.debian.net/reports/facets/system

This is the bit of vocabulary[1] that has been added:

  Facet: system
  Description: Class of system
   Class of system a package provides specific functionality for.

  Tag: system::cloud
  Description: Cloud
   Cloud computing is the delivery of computing as a service rather than
   a product, whereby shared resources, software, and information are
   provided to computers and other devices as a metered service over a
   network (typically the Internet).
   .
   Link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cloud_computing

  Tag: system::embedded
  Description: Embedded
   A computer system designed for specific control functions within a larger
   system.
   .
   Link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embedded_system

  Tag: system::laptop
  Description: Laptop
   A personal computer for mobile use.

Vocabulary additions

I'm proposing a few things for addition to the debtags vocabulary:

* devel::lang:erlang and implemented-in::erlang, for Erlang stuff

* devel::lang:vhdl, for VHDL tools

* devel::lang:verilog, for Verilog tools

* devel::lang:TODO, for development tools for languages that do not yet
  have their own "devel::lang:" tag.

* works-with-format::diff, for tools that work with diff-format
  patches. (Now if only we could apply debtags to commands and
  subcommands within a package, then we could tag stuff like "git diff"
  and "git am"...)

I have a debtags patch to justify all but the Erlang tags and
devel::lang:TODO; there are LOT of erlang-related packages, and TODO
tags are rather meta.

--

-- 
Hi! I'm a .signature virus! Copy me into your ~/.signature to help me spread!

Feedback on a new system::* set of tags

Hello,

I proposed a new set of tags to show what class of system a program is
specific for. The full proposal is at:
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/debtags-devel/2012-January/002157.html

The proposal contains a definition of 'embedded' that I took from
Wikipedia, and a question about smartphones vs tablets.

Can I have your feedback on that proposal?

Ciao,

Enrico

--

-- 
GPG key: 4096R/E7AD5568 2009-05-08 Enrico Zini <enrico <at> enricozini.org>

Tags in control files

Hello,

debtags tracks tags by package name, regardless of package version. That
is generally fine, except when packages get renamed, and we are using
the same set of tags for all releases (stable, testing and unstable).
Think git and chromium, for example.

Seemingly unrelated, some maintainers have asked me for a way to say
"tags on this package are final, please don't change them anymore".

A way to solve both problems is this: allow a maintainer to add a "Tag"
header in debian/control for some binary packages. If the Tag header
exists, that is authoritative; otherwise, the overrides are used.

By default, people would NOT add Tag headers to their debian/control.
However, if one wishes to have different tags for different versions of
a package, or if one prefers to have the tags of some of their packages
maintained over the BTS instead of the debtags.debian.net workflow, then
they are free to choose to do so.

AFAICT, however, this needs coordination with ftp-master. At the moment,
unless I am mistaken, the overrides I provide would overwrite a Tag:
header from debian/control, but what I'm looking for is to have the Tag:
header have priority over the overrides.

I could drop the overrides for packages that have tags in
debian/control, but that would mean dropping the overrides for any
version of the package, including old ones which instead would benefit
from the overrides.

Proposal for new debtags facet: "system"

Hello,

after some brainstorming with Thomas Goirand on IRC[2] about where to
place a "cloud" tag, the idea came out for a "system::*" facet as a spin
off of the "hardware::*" one, to represent the specific class of systems
a package can be specific for.

The idea is to take tags hardware::embedded and hardware::laptop out of the
hardware facet, leaving hardware more clearly defined as "peripherals", oo
"things with chips that you stick on a system", and add an orthogonal facet to
represent what kind of system a package would be specific for.

Here is a draft of the proposed new facet:

  Facet: system
  Description: Class of system
   Class of system a package provides specific functionality for.[1]

  Tag: system::cloud
  Description: Cloud
   Cloud computing is the delivery of computing as a service rather than
   a product, whereby shared resources, software, and information are
   provided to computers and other devices as a metered service over a
   network (typically the Internet).
   .
   Link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cloud_computing

  Tag: system::embedded
  Description: Embedded
   A computer system designed for specific control functions within a larger

Add new tag uitoolkit::xcb and maybe x11::composite-manager?

Hello,

Could it be possible to add a  new tag uitoolkit::xcb? ATM there is only
uitoolkit::xlib but many packages are using xcb instead of xlib.

Also, even though it would only concern very few packages, I'm wondering
if a  tag x11::compositing-manager  or x11::composite-manager  should be
added?

Regards,
--

-- 
Arnaud Fontaine