[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: Action Tags concept

On Fri, Oct 23, 2009 at 04:46:36PM +0200, Martin Bacovsky wrote:
> On Thursday 22 October 2009 16:33:06 you wrote:
> > 
> > I like this concept.  How does it relate to tagging?
> > * As a replacement for tagging
> > * As a separate feature from tagging
> > * In addition to tagging where some output utilizes both tags and actions
> I was thinking of replacing current tags, because I'm affraid users will be confused by two kinds of 
> tags. On the other hand I would keep categories imported from .desktop files (readonly/searchonly).
So I think we might be committed to having freeform tags for its use as a
comps replacement and grouping mechanism. I'm not 100% sure though. There is


tags: python, module, ssl, encryption, hashing, binding, MIT

Tasks: Use this to write programs in python that can communicate with
network services over SSL
Use this to write python programs that encrypt, decrypt, and hash data.

Actions: python programming, network programming, encryption programming?,
decryption programming? hash programming?

So there's some things that aren't captured (for instance that this is
licensed MIT (which may not be an issue, we can grab that from the license
tag) and that this is a binding (which I don't see how to capture in an

There's also some things that I wonder about a bit -- hash programming
and encryption progamming are awkward phrases -- makes me wonder if that's
trying to shoehorn a concept into the wrong tool.  How will user's know to
find the action encryption programming, hash programming, python
programming?  How will we compose the actions into tasks?

Also, how do we get the users to only enter actions(verbs) and not nouns
when supplying new actions for a package?


Attachment: pgp1AnVDvxfK4.pgp
Description: PGP signature

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]