[devel] [Joey Hess <joeyh@debian.org>] Bug#97755: [PROPOSAL] eliminating task packages; new task system

[devel] [Joey Hess <joeyh@debian.org>] Bug#97755: [PROPOSAL] eliminating task packages; new task system

[Peter Novodvorsky]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 55 bytes --]


Debian отказывается от прежней системы task пакетов:


[-- Attachment #2: Type: message/rfc822, Size: 4887 bytes --]

From: Joey Hess <joeyh@debian.org>
To: submit@bugs.debian.org, debian-boot@lists.debian.org
Subject: Bug#97755: [PROPOSAL] eliminating task packages; new task system
Date: Wed, 16 May 2001 22:43:31 -0400

Introduction:

After a lot of discussion, AJ and I have settled on a compromise that is 
acceptable to both of us about what to do to fix Debian's broken[1] task
system. 

Essentially, we propose throwing out all existing task packages, no 
longer using packages at all to deliver task information, formalizing 
the process by which tasks are modified/added, and moving the information
about what packages belong in each task out to the packages themselves
(or to the Packages file).

The new system:

Rather than having task packages any more, individual packages that
belong to a task can have a Task: control file field that lists the
names of tasks they are a part of. This field can also be added to the
Packages file by way of an override, even if a package does not contain
it. Doing things this way has a lot of benefits that AJ has recently
enumerated.

That is half of the data tasksel needs to display a task. The other half
is a description of the task (and ancillay information like the name of
the task, a section it is in, etc). That information will be delivered to
tasksel in the form of a single file (format much like a debian/control
file) which will ship with tasksel or in another package. We have
decided not to use individual debian packages for reasons which I have
recently discussed[2].

Tasksel will be modified[3] to put these two sources of information
together and display tasks for selection much as it does now.

Woody:

To roll this out in time for woody's freeze, we will make heavy use of
the overrides to add Task: fields to the Packages files. The possibility
is left open that later the overrides might be done away with, or
packages will at least be able to include matching Task: fields, but we're
not going to do that for woody, since there isn't time.

To make this happen in time for woody, I want to form a task force of 3
to 5 people to, in the next 3 weeks, look at the existing task packages,
and decide on a list of tasks that should come with woody, and come up with
the lists of packages that go in the tasks. This is intended as a
bootstrapping effort, not a group that will have long term control over
the tasks. If you're interested in being on the task force, please mail me.

Proposal:

Here's the actual proposal. I am of course looking for seconds.

--- policy.sgml.orig	Tue May 15 21:57:25 2001
+++ policy.sgml	Tue May 15 22:14:28 2001
@@ -1024,6 +1024,38 @@
 	  </p>
 	</sect1>
 
+        <sect1>
+	  <heading>Tasks</heading>
+
+	  <p>
+	    The Debian install process allows the user to choose from
+	    a number of common tasks which a Debian system can be used to
+	    perform. Selecting a task with <prgn>tasksel</prgn> causes
+	    a set of packages that are useful in performing that task to be
+	    installed.
+	  </p>
+
+	  <p>
+	    This set of packages is all available packages which have the
+	    name of the selected task in the <tt>Task<tt> field of their
+	    control file. The format of this field is a list of tasks,
+	    separated by commas.
+	  </p>
+
+         <p>
+           You should not tag any packages as belonging to a task before 
+           this has been discussed on the `debian-devel' mailing list and 
+	    a consensus about doing that has been reached.
+         </p>
+
+	  <p>
+	    For third parties (and historical reasons), tasksel also 
+	    supports constructing tasks based on `task packages'. These are
+	    packages whose names begin with `task-'. Task packages should
+	    not be included in the Debian archive.
+	  </p>
+	</sect1>
+
 	<sect1>
 	  <heading>Maintainer scripts</heading>
 
@@ -1282,8 +1309,8 @@
 		    <p>
 		      Having a separate package allows one to install
 		      the build-essential packages on a machine, as
-		      well as allowing other packages such as task
-		      packages to require installation of the
+		      well as allowing other packages and tasks
+		      to require installation of the
 		      build-essential packages using the depends
 		      relation.
 		    </p>

(AJ, note that I have changed it a bit from what you saw.)

-- 
see shy jo

[1] For the many reasons why we consider it broken and why it cannot be
    fixed in its current form, see discussions on debian-boot, debian-policy,
    and debian-devel in the past half year or so. Or just run tasksel
    sometime.
[2] Perhaps most lucidly at the end of <20010512133943.B7471@kitenet.net>
[3] I'm starting work on that soon.


--  
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-policy-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org


[-- Attachment #3: Type: text/plain, Size: 206 bytes --]



-- 
Peter Novodvorsky     http://www.altlinux.ru/    AltLinux Team, Russia
Debian.Org                                       http://debian.org/~nidd
            Debian  ---  no need to  wait for tomorrow.