Void-packages: Tagging packages

[anjandev]

As discussed on irc, there exists a tags variable for xbps templates:

https://github.com/void-linux/void-packages/blob/master/Manual.md

However, grepping for templates using this tags variable shows very few or no results.

I suggest that we standardize some tags for xbps (ie. games, electron, etc.) and write documentation on how to use xbps-query to search for tags in the void repos. Maybe we can add an option for users to exclude-tags=electron in their /etc/xbps.d so that users can have xbps automatically not suggest electron apps.

Tags can help us document pages like this: https://wiki.voidlinux.org/Games and help generally in users discovering new applications.

[ghost]

I second this, it could be very useful.

[GithubPrankster]

Also interested in this. Letting the user customize their query down to certain wished features is quite the useful thing.

[ericonr]

For the record, the machinery for tagging seems to be there:

architecture: x86_64
filename-sha256: fc9d82788efcf54692652b8b44afe8061e21662987e8368386b099571a9bbf80
filename-size: 10MB
homepage: https://github.com/arduino/arduino-cli
install-date: 2020-05-23 23:08 -03
installed_size: 22MB
license: GPL-3.0-or-later
maintainer: Jasper Chan <[email protected]>
metafile-sha256: 755adddd4961301658f24bb18f34a3454c2d33e28535a5ff8d6606ee8d22ef5e
pkgname: arduino-cli
pkgver: arduino-cli-0.10.0_2
repository: /home/ericonr/void/void-packages/hostdir/binpkgs/arduino
run_depends:
    glibc>=2.29_1
shlib-requires:
    libpthread.so.0
    libc.so.6
short_desc: Arduino command line interface
state: installed
tags: embedded arduino

also

$ xbps-query -p tags -s arduino
arduino-cli-0.10.0_2: embedded arduino

[anjandev]

It would be useful to add to xlint a check to see if each template the
person has changed has at least one "primary" tag which we can define.

This would allow us to eventually tag the entire repository
incrementally as packages update rather than requiring massive effort
on the part of maintainers.

Of course, we first need to decide on tags.

[ericonr]

Tagging incrementally would be better than all at once, indeed. I'm not against this idea, but I'm not a maintainer either. There might be reasons against this.

It would make sense to have a "permitted tags" list drafted as well.

base-system
games (game?)
dev
x11
wayland
graphics
art
...

[Anachron]

I would expect tags to be written in a singular format.
A permitted tag list can easily be solved by a xlint grep.

My suggestion: Start with bigger topics (like compiler, window-manager, game etc) and then maybe split them up/specify those later, if needed.

[travankor]

Is there a consensus to have every package tagged?

[flexibeast]

i'd be interested in the opinions of @void-linux/pkg-committers on this.

[Vaelatern]

We have tags. I don't know what they'd get us that descriptions and pkgnames don't.

[ericonr]

As a simple example, a search for "game" doesn't give me xonotic nor openmw. I don't think this justifies the whole endeavor, but it's an example.

[Vaelatern]

Then I imagine the following guidance.

If you think your package should show up in a search, but the search term isn't in the package name or description, then feel free to add it as a tag.

There is no reason to tag most packages most times.

[Duncaen]

I don't think because the name or description already contains the tag would be a good reason to not use the tag.

The whole idea is to have a standardized set of tags to help without categorizing packages so you can discover new packages without vague search terms that might not be part of the description.

[Vaelatern]

So you are in favor of a tagging effort, Duncaen?

[pullmoll]

I tend to agree with @Duncaen while I would not myself take time to work on tagging. There are certainly Void users who would like to contribute by adding tags to a list of packages.

Perhaps such a list can be established as a shared document which everyone can edit, or as a file in a separate repository where PRs can be submitted to add or modify entries for the per package tag list.

I only fear the noise that generates in my mailbox :)

[leahneukirchen]

I'd recommend looking at Debian for an idea of a taxonomy instead of starting from scratch.

[anddam]

There is no reason to tag most packages most times.

I do agree with the loose tagging system this seems to hint at, where a maintainer can add a tag but not every package needs to have at least one, even less a _primary_ one.

I figure every rigid taxonomy scheme is bound to find its platypus at some point in the future, you just cannot see it now. With a loose tagging you apply two or three tags, no priority there, and you are done.

Just my two eurocents.