Idea - schematic information in %description

[Jeff Johnson]

On May 3, 2007, at 11:56 AM, Przemyslaw Iskra wrote:

> On Thu, May 03, 2007 at 08:57:40AM -0400, Jeff Johnson wrote:
>> If you want package categories, please add as a separate tag, not by
>> overloading description.
>
> Yup, that would be a better idea. I was thinking about %description
> because it actually works. Adding new tag requires some work in  
> rpm, as
> well as a decent support in poldek. But making a list of all possible
> categories and tags, and than adding it to packages is going to take
> a lot of time anyway.
>

I'll be happy to do the rpm work. There is little additional poldek  
work if
categories are added as a header extension tag.

> I don't really feel the idea of adding such information separatelly  
> from
> building process. Of course it isn't wise to rebuild some big package
> just because of changes in summary, description or category, but in  
> case
> of our automation a lot of work may be required to do it other way  
> than
> rebuilding the package.


You may not see the difference, but I certainly do. Every month
someone is suggesting a new package organization and wishes to
use or change some hierarchy or values.

Category information *must* be outside of packaging so that users
may rearrange the tag values and hierarchy to taste.

Your suggestion is the 4th this year that I am aware of.

73 de Jeff