Repositories, archive, sources, components, categories...

[Robin Sonefors]

The first time I spotted the word channel was in SMART Package
Manager[1]. It's developed by mvo/Canonical, so it could have some
relevance here.

1. http://labix.org/smart

It's FAQ says [2]:
"What repository formats does Smart support?
Smart supports the following repository formats as source channels: 

      * RPM repositories
      * DEB repositories
      * Slackware
      * Mirrors
"

2.http://labix.org/smart/faq#head-3b6a7533dee5f87959c30ca819e11d155697b275

So I think there is some kind of logic buried somewhere deep down. A
repository as a source channel...

sön 2006-05-28 klockan 18:51 +0100 skrev Matthew East:
> Hi Sebastian,
> 
> On Sun, 2006-05-28 at 17:01 +0200, Sebastian Heinlein - glatzor wrote:
> > Am Sonntag, den 28.05.2006, 14:35 +0100 schrieb Matthew East:
> > > On Sun, 2006-05-28 at 21:31 +0800, Jerome Gotangco wrote:
> > > > Well in all honesty, we (me, mvo, glatzor) did discuss it before in
> > > > the desktop channel but was only limited for g-a-i itself, but yes,
> > > > this should have been distributed all throughout (apologiies).
> > > > 
> > > > Not to mention stuff like this is a shoo-in for the styleguide.
> > > 
> > > Well, I think that if a decision has really been taken to change the
> > > vocabulary used for something like this, it should have been decided by
> > > the technical board and implemented throught the distribution. Having
> > > one word for the g-a-i tools and one word for the rest of the world is
> > > really not helpful.
> > 
> > I wrote to the devel list about this issue some monthes ago. Nobody
> > replied. So what should I have done? I also nagged many people on IRC.
> > 
> > https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-devel/2006-March/016358.html
> > 
> > I used the strings of the specs that I found on the wiki. See above. I
> > could not know that the spec used strings that were not approved.
> 
> It looks to me like you did absolutely everything you should have. It is
> a shame that no one replied to your message.
> 
> However, I have to say that the use of different vocabulary in various
> parts of the distribution (the UI isn't even consistent within itself -
> Synaptic uses "Repositories") can only be a bad idea.
> 
> To give an extreme and very unlikely example: imagine if Epiphany
> suddenly changed all the instances of "internet" in their UI to
> "hyperweb". That would obviously be quite confusing, because the
> generally accepted standard word is "internet", and all the other
> related applications use it.
> 
> Now it's an extreme example because the word "internet" is obviously
> _really_ standard, and it's a _really_ common word and there are loads
> of applications that use it.
> 
> However it's the same principle: "repository" is the standard vocabulary
> used and understood by Debian and Ubuntu users, both the Debian and
> Ubuntu websites use it. Changing this in some applications and not
> others is going to create confusion. It should be changed in all of
> them, if at all, I think.
> 
> (For what it's worth, my opinion is that "repository" is a much more
> readily understand term than "channel", that is why it was adopted in
> the first place, I'd say).
> 
> Matt
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 191 bytes
Desc: Detta ?r en digitalt signerad	meddelandedel
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-doc/attachments/20060528/4fd6df80/attachment.pgp>