According to metadata.xml, the x11-apps category is meant to hold packages from X.org. All of those that have HOMEPAGE defined are probably in the wrong category: amlc/amlc-0.5.1.ebuild:HOMEPAGE="http://sourceforge.net/projects/amlc.berlios/" ardesia/ardesia-1.0.ebuild:HOMEPAGE="https://code.google.com/p/ardesia/" ccsm/ccsm-0.8.4-r4.ebuild:HOMEPAGE="http://www.compiz.org/" ccsm/ccsm-0.8.4-r5.ebuild:HOMEPAGE="http://www.compiz.org/" copyq/copyq-2.4.9.ebuild:HOMEPAGE="https://github.com/hluk/CopyQ" fusion-icon/fusion-icon-0.1-r4.ebuild:HOMEPAGE="http://compiz.org" mesa-progs/mesa-progs-8.2.0.ebuild:HOMEPAGE="http://mesa3d.sourceforge.net/" mesa-progs/mesa-progs-8.3.0.ebuild:HOMEPAGE="http://mesa3d.sourceforge.net/" mesa-progs/mesa-progs-9999.ebuild:HOMEPAGE="http://mesa3d.sourceforge.net/" python-whiteboard/python-whiteboard-20101012.ebuild:HOMEPAGE="https://github.com/pnegre/python-whiteboard" radeontop/radeontop-0.8.ebuild:HOMEPAGE="https://github.com/clbr/radeontop" radeontop/radeontop-0.9.ebuild:HOMEPAGE="https://github.com/clbr/radeontop" radeontop/radeontop-9999.ebuild:HOMEPAGE="https://github.com/clbr/radeontop" simple-ccsm/simple-ccsm-0.8.4-r2.ebuild:HOMEPAGE="http://www.compiz.org/" spotlighter/spotlighter-0.1.ebuild:HOMEPAGE="https://code.google.com/p/ardesia/" transset/transset-1.0.1.ebuild:HOMEPAGE="http://www.freedesktop.org/wiki/Software/xapps http://cgit.freedesktop.org/xorg/app/transset/" whyteboard/whyteboard-0.41.1.ebuild:HOMEPAGE="https://code.google.com/p/whyteboard" xinput_calibrator/xinput_calibrator-0.7.5.ebuild:HOMEPAGE="http://www.freedesktop.org/wiki/Software/xinput_calibrator" xkbset/xkbset-0.5-r1.ebuild:HOMEPAGE="http://www.math.missouri.edu/~stephen/software/" xrectsel/xrectsel-0.3.1.ebuild:HOMEPAGE="https://github.com/lolilolicon/xrectsel" xtitle/xtitle-1.0.2.ebuild:HOMEPAGE="http://www.cs.indiana.edu/~kinzler/xtitle/" xtitle/xtitle-1.0.3.ebuild:HOMEPAGE="http://www.cs.indiana.edu/~kinzler/xtitle/" xvfb-run/xvfb-run-1.17.2_p2.ebuild:HOMEPAGE="https://packages.debian.org/sid/xvfb" xwarppointer/xwarppointer-1-r2.ebuild:HOMEPAGE="http://www.ishiboo.com/~nirva/Projects/xwarppointer/"
I filed bugs for all those except the ones that mention freedesktop.org or are maintained by x11@gentoo.org
Has this been agreed with Xorg team already that the depend bugs are done? I would rather say the metadata.xml is wrong, and these days x11-apps should contain applications that are X specific. That is, require X11 and won't work with e.g Wayland. Perfect example of such apps that I would say belong in x11-apps would be xinput_calibrator, transset, xkbset, xtitle, xwarppointer, etc. Unless they have a much better fit elsewhere based on its purpose.
duh, conflict removed the other depend instead of applying only the comment addition. Re-adding for now.
(In reply to Mart Raudsepp from comment #2) > Has this been agreed with Xorg team already that the depend bugs are done? I > would rather say the metadata.xml is wrong, <longdescription lang="en"> x11-apps contains applications distributed as part of X.Org X11. </longdescription> That's "wrong" now? > and these days x11-apps should > contain applications that are X specific. That is, require X11 and won't > work with e.g Wayland. We have a default category for "applications that are X specific" but don't fit anywhere else: <longdescription lang="en"> The x11-misc category contains miscellaneous X11 applications which do not belong elsewhere. </longdescription> It might be nice to have a wayland apps category, but I think that's outside the scope of this bug report. > Perfect example of such apps that I would say belong > in x11-apps would be xinput_calibrator, transset, xkbset, xtitle, > xwarppointer, etc. Unless they have a much better fit elsewhere based on its > purpose. I already exempted the x11@ maintained ones. I don't see where you're going by suggesting the category is now invalid and any random use of it is now fine. I guess it would mean less work?
I want the x11 team to re-evaluate that description at present day, given that there really are no more X.Org "katamari" releases. x11-misc is less clear than x11-apps. Apps are applications, misc is, well, something?
Only thing I've heard back from more core x11 team members has been "<chithead> leio: changing the category description would be less work than pkgmove. but if someone else wants to do the work, I don't object". Sounds rather neutral either way. In my opinion limiting x11-apps based on X.org or not doesn't make any sense anymore. I would put apps that are very x11 specific in there, this includes quite a few that are in the bug depend list. I think it is rather premature to just move everything out based on some old category description with even a QAcanfix keyword and whatnot, without a clear decision from the actual x11 team; only to be potentially moved back later (which can get complicated with pkgmove atoms).
(In reply to Mart Raudsepp from comment #6) > [...] only to be potentially moved back later (which can get complicated > with pkgmove atoms). Strictly speaking, this cannot be done. A qualified package name that was the origin of a package move is "burned" forever and must not be reused.
(In reply to Ulrich Müller from comment #7) I think only moving back to the same qualified package name and slot is impossible. In principle moving back to the previous category/package and different slot can work.
Ah, scratch my previous comment. That is not allowed by PMS as I read it.
Yes, ok, but can we stop moving them now hastily and actually make a decision here what x11-apps is? imho it should be X11 specific apps that don't fit elsewhere - stuff like xwarppointer, etc; whatever the source upstream.
(In reply to Mart Raudsepp from comment #10) > Yes, ok, but can we stop moving them now hastily and actually make a > decision here what x11-apps is? imho it should be X11 specific apps that > don't fit elsewhere - stuff like xwarppointer, etc; whatever the source > upstream. Well, so far it seems everyone simply disagrees with your take on the matter and is happily moving these packages to new homes.
(In reply to Jeroen Roovers from comment #11) > Well, so far it seems everyone simply disagrees with your take on the matter > and is happily moving these packages to new homes. Speak for yourself. You have thrown a number of 'QA' bugs over random people who have better things to do than discuss moving stuff. I'm with Mart here, since the move doesn't really make any sense, much like the use of distinct categories these days.
(In reply to Michał Górny from comment #12) > (In reply to Jeroen Roovers from comment #11) > > Well, so far it seems everyone simply disagrees with your take on the matter > > and is happily moving these packages to new homes. > > Speak for yourself. I was doing exactly that and so was Mart. > You have thrown a number of 'QA' bugs over random people > who have better things to do than discuss moving stuff. Random people? Is that just strong language? Did I wrongly assign bugs? Also, some maintainers apparently choose to do a pkgmove rather than discuss. If you disagree that some packages should not move, then as maintainer you might close them as WONTFIX. Nobody's stopping that. As for the 'QA' label, that's generally where this type of bug report should be categorised, I guess. > I'm with Mart here, since the move doesn't really make any > sense, much like the use of distinct categories these days. Well, for one thing you might explain why using distinct categories doesn't really make any sense these days, and for another you might want to do it on an appropriate mailing list.
(In reply to Michał Górny from comment #12) > I'm with Mart here, since the move doesn't really make any sense, much like > the use of distinct categories these days. I assume that with "distinct categories" you mean x11-apps and x11-misc? We have more such examples in the tree, for example dev-texlive versus dev-tex.
I am not at all opposed to x11-apps/ containing only things from https://cgit.freedesktop.org/xorg/app/ It would make my life a little easier figuring out what packages x11@ owns :) The idea that x11-apps/ is an okay category for applications just because they are "applications that use X" is not very sound. That doesn't extend to other things -- there's no gtk-apps or python-apps, etc. An argument could be made to keep things like mesa-progs in x11-apps, but I think even that makes more sense in another category.
