Package grouping

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
5 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Package grouping

houghi
I just looked at http://en.opensuse.org/Patterns
I don't see much going on there. Does this mean that this is the final
proposal?

I have added some, that I felt were missing. Even if they are not
selected, I hope to keep the discussion going and we can't afford to get
it wrong.

The main thing I did was add some graphical enviroments (including CLI)
and add office and games. The thing I miss most is 'normal' programs for
the end-user.

Also would it not be easier to use the current package groups as a start
and then go from there? e.g. when I look at just games, I see:
Amusement
|--Games
|  |--3D
|  |  |--Other
|  |  |--Race
|  |  `-- ...
|  |--Action
|  |  |--Arcade
|  |  `--....
|  |--Board
|  `--...
`--Toys
   |--Background
   `--...

Seems like an awefull good place to start. This has been made over the
years and I would think it to be a pity to just throw the knowledge away.
Also realize that many people who use SUSE for years know where to look,
so even if it is not going to be the main pattern, it would be nice to
have a pattern "Ye Olde S.u.S.E. way" that contained the familiar groups
people know.

--
houghi http://houghi.org
        Personally, I think most sports fans are a little "gay". They'd
        rather watch a bunch of sweaty guys jumping all over eachother,
        than, say fashion TV - where hot models walk down the runway.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Package grouping

Rajko M.
houghi wrote:

> I just looked at http://en.opensuse.org/Patterns
> I don't see much going on there. Does this mean that this is the final
> proposal?
>
> I have added some, that I felt were missing. Even if they are not
> selected, I hope to keep the discussion going and we can't afford to get
> it wrong.
>
> The main thing I did was add some graphical enviroments (including CLI)
> and add office and games. The thing I miss most is 'normal' programs for
> the end-user.
>
> Also would it not be easier to use the current package groups as a start
> and then go from there? e.g. when I look at just games, I see:
> Amusement
> |--Games
> |  |--3D
> |  |  |--Other
> |  |  |--Race
> |  |  `-- ...
> |  |--Action
> |  |  |--Arcade
> |  |  `--....
> |  |--Board
> |  `--...
> `--Toys
>    |--Background
>    `--...
>
> Seems like an awefull good place to start. This has been made over the
> years and I would think it to be a pity to just throw the knowledge away.
> Also realize that many people who use SUSE for years know where to look,
> so even if it is not going to be the main pattern, it would be nice to
> have a pattern "Ye Olde S.u.S.E. way" that contained the familiar groups
> people know.
>

This and many other projects / jobs depends on naming schema.
When Andreas announced patterns, I stated to think, by n-th time, how to
organize all the software in an easy to remember groups, how to define
categories, subcategories, and further subsub...categories.

The way I understand patterns, is to allow for smaller software groups
(package modules) that can be reused for bigger ones, up to the
installation system.

It might be just me, but up to now I haven't seen any comprehensive
analysis how to categorize all software included in openSUSE repository.

That is huge task and it should be split in smaller steps, that single
person can comprehend. I tried to solve similar problem with
openSUSE.org categories looking in http://dmoz.org (open directory
project) for examples, but it wasn't helpful for me.

I would try to see what kind of computers are in use, what should be
installed by default on each to make it the most usable right out of the
box:
desktop, workstation (audio, video, graphic), gaming, general purpose,
laptop, ...
server, ...
etc.
When we have this defined than we can discuss what software should be
included in each category. If we have no clear target(s) all grouping
and regrouping is just playing around existing software groups.


That is basically start from scratch, but it is also the only way to
create usable usage patterns that can be translated to patterns as a
software groups.

--
Regards,
Rajko.
Visit http://en.opensuse.org/MiniSUSE

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Package grouping

Andreas Jaeger
In reply to this post by houghi
houghi <[hidden email]> writes:

> I just looked at http://en.opensuse.org/Patterns
> I don't see much going on there. Does this mean that this is the final
> proposal?

No, not at all.  For alpha3 I just implemented a bit to show what's
possible...

I hope the discussion starts again - thanks for doing that!

> I have added some, that I felt were missing. Even if they are not
> selected, I hope to keep the discussion going and we can't afford to get
> it wrong.
>
> The main thing I did was add some graphical enviroments (including CLI)
> and add office and games. The thing I miss most is 'normal' programs for
> the end-user.
>
> Also would it not be easier to use the current package groups as a start
> and then go from there? e.g. when I look at just games, I see:
No, not really - patterns are more roles.  The two are orthogonal.

> Amusement
> |--Games
> |  |--3D
> |  |  |--Other
> |  |  |--Race
> |  |  `-- ...
> |  |--Action
> |  |  |--Arcade
> |  |  `--....
> |  |--Board
> |  `--...
> `--Toys
>    |--Background
>    `--...
>
> Seems like an awefull good place to start. This has been made over the
> years and I would think it to be a pity to just throw the knowledge away.
> Also realize that many people who use SUSE for years know where to look,
> so even if it is not going to be the main pattern, it would be nice to
> have a pattern "Ye Olde S.u.S.E. way" that contained the familiar groups
> people know.
Andreas
--
 Andreas Jaeger, [hidden email], http://www.suse.de/~aj/
  SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany
   GPG fingerprint = 93A3 365E CE47 B889 DF7F  FED1 389A 563C C272 A126

attachment0 (194 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Package grouping

Andreas Jaeger
In reply to this post by Rajko M.
Rajko M <[hidden email]> writes:

> I would try to see what kind of computers are in use, what should be
> installed by default on each to make it the most usable right out of the
> box:
> desktop, workstation (audio, video, graphic), gaming, general purpose,
> laptop, ...
> server, ...

This is the idea basically.  Define Common use cases - and then add
the packages.

> etc.
> When we have this defined than we can discuss what software should be
> included in each category. If we have no clear target(s) all grouping
> and regrouping is just playing around existing software groups.
>
>
> That is basically start from scratch, but it is also the only way to
> create usable usage patterns that can be translated to patterns as a
> software groups.


Andreas
--
 Andreas Jaeger, [hidden email], http://www.suse.de/~aj/
  SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany
   GPG fingerprint = 93A3 365E CE47 B889 DF7F  FED1 389A 563C C272 A126

attachment0 (194 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Package grouping

Rajko M.
Andreas Jaeger wrote:

> Rajko M <[hidden email]> writes:
>
>> I would try to see what kind of computers are in use, what should be
>> installed by default on each to make it the most usable right out of the
>> box:
>> desktop, workstation (audio, video, graphic), gaming, general purpose,
>> laptop, ...
>> server, ...
>
> This is the idea basically.  Define Common use cases - and then add
> the packages.
>
>> etc.
>> When we have this defined than we can discuss what software should be
>> included in each category. If we have no clear target(s) all grouping
>> and regrouping is just playing around existing software groups.
>>
>>
>> That is basically start from scratch, but it is also the only way to
>> create usable usage patterns that can be translated to patterns as a
>> software groups.
>
>
> Andreas

This is fine.
Now we can go to look and research.

It seems that others are not very eager to jump in.
I would assume that my comment on tasks on opensuse mail list apply here
too. Someone has to break down one huge task into components.
In tradition of open source I should look in the mirror for first
candidate, but with time that I have available for all tasks around
openSUSE this will go very slow, so please, anybody else that can jump in.

I'll do some work, but somebody with experience can give a jump start.

--
Regards,
Rajko.
Visit http://en.opensuse.org/MiniSUSE