I've seen a couple of suggestions about the general problem that we have too many packages and the users can't be expected to decide about them all. I think we need to decide what the desired user interface is, and then how to implement it.
I submit that the desired user interface is that the user is offered (by defautlt) a set of `categories' or `keywords' or whatever, something like Standard internet protocol clients. Software development tools. and gets to choose whether they want them. Each of those categories corresponds to a list of packages, and the resulting installation is the union of them. Perhaps categories will have different levels of support which might correspond to Priorities. I think we're all pretty much agreed so far. Clearly these categories are not sections, because a package may be in none, or more than one, or be installed regardless (eg, a Required package). The next question to ask ourselves is: who decides on these categories and who decides on which packages are in them ? Clearly the categories need to be decided on centrally, so their descriptions can be specified centrally. I think that if we have a stronger Priority mechanism, which distinguishes Optional packages that most people will want from those which most people should probably ignore, we can just allow package maintainers to decide which categorie(s) their package fits into. Then the categories are like keywords. So we end up with: * A file in the distribution alongside the Packages file. We could call it Categories. It contains a list of the categories. Each category would have one or more levels of support; for each level of support it lists the keyword/priority combinations that should be included. * Package installation tools should by default select packages according to whether they match the selected level of any category. But, the user can go in at a more detailed level and (de)select individual packages. What do people think ? Ian.
