On Fri, 28 Mar 2014 15:46:49 -0400 Wyatt Epp <wyatt....@gmail.com> wrote: > On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 1:14 PM, Ciaran McCreesh > <ciaran.mccre...@googlemail.com> wrote: > > On Thu, 27 Mar 2014 03:53:47 +0100 > > yac <y...@gentoo.org> wrote: > >> What I was describing is the difference between fundamental > >> properties of categories and tags. > > > > You are trying to redefine categories in terms of a concept that > > they didn't originally represent. > > No one's redefining anything. You seem awfully fixated on the history > that forced categories to exist, which doesn't really matter in this > context. Regardless of any of that, people can and _do_ attempt to > use categories as a rudimentary method of attempting to search for > packages.
"Giving something a unique unambiguous name" is not a historical issue. It's something we still need, and a core part of how package manglers work. You can't just pretend that categories there for exactly this. > > From a package mangler perspective, > > categories aren't just "a label" for a package. They're > > fundamentally part of a package's name. > > > From that standpoint, they're even less adequate for lookup; encoding > metadata in names has never turned out well for anyone. Things still need a unique unambiguous name. It's that or GUIDs... -- Ciaran McCreesh
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
