On 2019/10/29, summary of Jan E's 10/16 msg by Linda W.:
-----------(Rough summary): MAY OF 2018. Comments by various authors: [1.0] TC, [1.0] TC, [1.0] TC, [1.3] WR, [1.4] WR, [1.5] MC, [1.6] MC [Note1] Conclusion: [Note2] move to "multi-valued" "Tags" from single-valued "Group" Supporting args by [1.3] Jan E. and suse proponents [1.9] Scott B., [1.4] Wolfgang R., [1.7] Adam M., & [1.8] Stefan B. -as- (Summary:) useful for indexing, exploring, finding-SW, & how to use; incl. use by Debian (initial src for other distros)
No opponent arguments for using future of a "Tags value" as multi-valued "Group" from: Tomas C., Matěj C., Michal K.
Note1: Supporters made case to work with it. Note2: Being meritocracy(?really?) decision to keep "Group tag"[sic].
Not exactly,: not as a *single-value* field, but as a multi-valued field, to-be-kept & enhanced.
JUNE OF 2019.
[2.0] IG: Fedora guy proposing adopting Fedora's deletion of such fields from Debian's packaging that included it, and Suse's re-implenting of such. (JE: Link to prev. discussion). [2.1] NG: Dislike of classification removal by Fedora + proposing continuation of it in some form.
[2.2] TC: "We are"[sic - "I am"] already in process of abandoning single-value group field as useless and a few are wrong.
CONCLUSION: JUNE 2019 - addition of more people aware and opinioned.
Note parallel to multiple, earlier, suse discussions/issues where a "do-acracy", [those who "do", "rule"] overrides a group consensus for alternate or parallel approach. There is more than one example, though some may primarily remember only one big example. I've been using suse for a bit over 2 decades (since the late 90's) and have seen this pattern repeated including examples involving current and previous board members, not all of whom will see this summary due to their own filters (some technical and some unconscious).
AUGUST 2019.
[3.0] TC: "As there was no major pushback" and "Your lonely complain[t] is not one"
A prime "doer" that no one has stopped him from him "doing" deletion work and dismisses arguments, against, as these discussions aren't by "doers".
Other views by SK, HPJ, BV, and JE expressed to: - not required Group line though noting no good reason to eliminate it - Noting that removal is added (extra) work.
ACTIONS (AUG. 2019) that: * Not enforcing Groups in ".spec" files and allowing freeform specification (rpmlint) AND not removing existing lines. * Showcase a tag browser w/backwards compat. using group as a tag.
OCTOBER 2019.
[] Group-removers express "Doacracy" Credo: maintainers are the *doers* and [4.2, 4.3] says there are problems with current system.
Group-to-Tags supporters display upset at doacracy's unilateral actions. [4.0, 4.4] JE & [4.5] HPJ
For exact footnote hyperlinks, see Jan Engelhardt's original summary: https://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-factory/2019-10/msg00095.html. I won't, _explicitly_ offer my opinion on providing users with more information and/or "choice", but note that the less information users or user/implementors have, the more likely it seems they will go along with what has been chosen for them. I thought I had a point in all this, but in summarizing this, I seem to have misplaced it, and sorry if you felt reading this was time wasted. Carry-on -- all seem normal. p.s. - oh screw it, has anyone tried classifying music into the pre-existing '8' categories (now over 200 and still not a free-format list) that were provided by some music players 20-30 years ago and really thought that just one category applied to their music? Is software that different? 𝓛inda -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org