Abstraction over Debian Packages in Kapture (was: [devel] Another idea)

Dominique Devriese <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.comp.kde.debian
Message-ID <87wu7yupjv.fsf_-___27918.6671636582$1073857575@student.kuleuven.ac.be>
Marcin Pawlik writes:

>> I played around a bit with making Kapture not show the Debian
>> package names in the list view, but instead the short description.
>> I have got some code running, but it is unfortunately
>>
>> 1. Pretty slow ( the short and long descriptions are not part of
>>    the cache that apt maintains,

> AFAIK they are. Don't know if this is the fastest method but you can
> create pkgRecords object and call its ShortDesc() and
> LongDesc(). The only thing I remember useful for average user and
> not present in apt cache is the list of package files.

>> so they have to be gotten from the packages files directly ).

> Are you reading the data from /var/lib/dpkg/info? 

No, you misunderstood me.  I was talking about pkgRecords.  IIUC, it
gets its information not from the cache, but from the package files in
/var/lib/apt/lists/.  This is also the reason why apt-cache search is
pretty useless ( uses only the names of the packages, and their
Provides lines ), and "grep-alternatives" is far better in many cases.

>> Thus, the displaying of the entire list takes quite a while ( as in
>> half a minute or so )

> What is the entire list? List of packages installed or available? 
> How many packages are in there and why do you want to display
> descriptions for all of them, not only for the ones at the moment
> visible for the user?

You're right about this.  I have thought about this too, but haven't
had the time to do it yet.  Help is always welcome, of course ;) 

>> 2. Pretty unusable.  The current Debian package Descriptions are
>>    not
>> usable for this purpose.  They're meant to be shown alongside the
>> package name, not instead of it.  I would personally like it
>> otherwise, as the package names are obviously not interesting to
>> the user

> For me it is. For example when I look for some program I start from
> searching for the package having this program name as a part of the
> name. The description along with the package name is of course
> really handy but the name IMO should also be there.

Well, currently, I agree with you, because the current "short
description"s are for a large part such that they rely on the name
being shown too in order to be informative ( even though the Debian
policy specifically says this is wrong ). 

However, don't you think that it would be better if we could ditch the
package name ( imagine what a user thinks when he sees a name like
libqt3c102-mt ) in the public interface, and replace it with a single
proper, user-friendly, translated description ?  There could of course
still be an interface to search for a package by name ( so you can
tell a user to install the package libqt3c102-mt to fix his probs
e.g. ), but the major inteface should not show it.

I have been thinking further about it, and imho, we will never be able
to provide a nice Package Installer Interface that is anywhere near
the Red Hat one ( that someone posted a screenshot to ), unless we
provide an extra level of abstraction over the Debian packages.  A
very rough mind sketch of this idea would be to add a separate data
file containing metadata about some limited set of packages that we
think the user may want to install.  We could keep data in there like
icons, proper, user-aimed descriptions ( the current ones are all
aimed towards a technically capable admin, as Debian policy requires )
and a grouping system.  The number of packages could be kept as low as
one hundred, I think, not any more than the number of packages
included on the live cd ( check out
kdenonbeta/kdedebian/livecd/packagelist/alpha6_list ) minus the number
of "under-the-hood" packages that are in there.

I would propose to make such a list, consisting of packages that
fulfill the following criteria:

1. The user knows they exist ( exclude library packages, kernel
   packages, base and essential packages, perhaps even all non-GUI
   packages ).
2. They have a certain amount of popularity, or are likely to gain
   it.  This is of course a very arbitrary decision, but I'm sure it
   is possible to make it.

We could then make a very user-friendly package manager, still
enjoying the power of apt under the hood.  If you feel inclined to
reply "but what if I want to install rarely-used terminal application
XXX", think about the following point:

We're not working on a package manager for ourselves, but for users.
There's nothing to stop us from doing apt-get install xxx, it can even
be used alongside the pkg-manager I'm proposing.

Sorry about the long mail, but what do you think of the idea ?

cheers
domi
_______________________________________________
kde-debian-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-debian-devel
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.