[aur-general] Vote - Moving [community] to use same system as main repos

Aaron Griffin aaronmgriffin at gmail.com
Sat Jan 24 18:49:02 EST 2009

On Sat, Jan 24, 2009 at 8:52 AM, Dieter Plaetinck <dieter at plaetinck.be> wrote:
> On Sat, 24 Jan 2009 09:25:59 -0500
> Loui Chang <louipc.ist at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Sat, Jan 24, 2009 at 01:27:18PM +0100, Geoffroy Carrier wrote:
>> > On Sat, Jan 24, 2009 at 06:42, Loui Chang <louipc.ist at gmail.com>
>> > wrote:
>> > > I think the categories would be removed.
>> >
>> > I think categories are completely useless and should be removed from
>> > unsupported too. AFAIK, only [community] is really maintained as a
>> > tree.
>> I actually like categories. They really help quickly whittle down
>> searches. The only problem is that a package can officially only be
>> in one category, when actually it could easily fit into two or more.
> what about tags instead of categories?

Actually, this is proposed for pacman as well. I think it's a good
idea. Let me explain how this is relevant:

Right now our 'categories' are for organization. It's a holdover from
CRUX, if I recall. When we moved the official repos over to svn, we
did away with categories because they just don't make sense. Where do
perl modules go? The category based on the task it does (i.e.
network)? The modules category? The perl category? Kernel modules in
the kernel category? Or modules? Ugh... too much confusion.

The proposed category feature for pacman works more like arbitrary
tagging. This perl module can have categories=(network modules perl).
Problem solved. The initial intent was to aid in searching, too.
pacman -Ss --category multimedia blah.

We could use a similar system in the aur, but make it more free-form.
I think it makes more sense, as the categories are SOLELY used for
mental orgnaization.

More information about the aur-general mailing list