From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "T.V. Raman" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: list-packages: Marking packages as "uninteresting"? Date: Tue, 22 May 2012 01:00:32 -0700 Message-ID: References: <87bolmj37w.fsf@destructor.i-did-not-set--mail-host-address--so-tickle-me> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1337673655 18507 80.91.229.3 (22 May 2012 08:00:55 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 22 May 2012 08:00:55 +0000 (UTC) To: Stefan Monnier , Jeremiah Dodds , emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue May 22 10:00:53 2012 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1SWk1S-0002cg-Ch for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 22 May 2012 10:00:50 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:46801 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1SWk1R-0007pn-UM for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 22 May 2012 04:00:49 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:59491) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1SWk1J-0007o0-St for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 22 May 2012 04:00:47 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1SWk1D-0000Mn-Gm for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 22 May 2012 04:00:41 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-yx0-f169.google.com ([209.85.213.169]:51140) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1SWk1D-0000MU-AO for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 22 May 2012 04:00:35 -0400 Original-Received: by yenm7 with SMTP id m7so6203264yen.0 for ; Tue, 22 May 2012 01:00:32 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; bh=8CmJ0fHSUVaoeBeoXaWUQ9vBXunB0wR0rzszzE8WJzM=; b=xWzNVdLJh/dilqM+KLO2dCY2IbG5GO7igzdwsAPUWaWGi/nsS7uWclvM7euI/j1YBx 1a/hi3MadsUWwHNF5vpSlE7fFrOWeXmZkIRjPhJqfwATY8y8y1irD/lpdp4qzxKIR7/m 70Dpxb4YQqxFsisA4JSYeM2MwNxHF7GQf5jRogila3ka0BXcp5GB5ZYll6kgamjmQZ9Q RF11mfiyr8BvvIx53EcujG1ZgEubxNsypYV815ItYOFjNeaYh8MhJPOzy/25QPJqwOcH a+d3K7JawYrs+NQUJPeeXL8gc+Fo5ptJUd6U15OetpLNzXSc3mDfJjAXmFUNQIJW+0sz wuhQ== Original-Received: by 10.50.183.198 with SMTP id eo6mr8563593igc.61.1337673632308; Tue, 22 May 2012 01:00:32 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: by 10.231.13.194 with HTTP; Tue, 22 May 2012 01:00:32 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-Received-From: 209.85.213.169 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:150602 Archived-At: Enabling users to add a tag would be the most flexible approach. I am not a huge fan of categorization as a solution to all evils, because it's basically a case of shoving things into drawers -- and then later not knowing what drawer you stuck it into. Emacs with incremental seach makes such things unnecessary:-) So if we do categorize and collapse things based on catagorization, let's implement that using invisibility specs since that works with isearch --- so I wouldn't need to know if you stuck say "org-mode" in the authoring drawer or the "gtd" drawer or whatever, I'd just isearch for org and get it. -- -- On 5/17/12, Stefan Monnier wrote: >> I'd personally much rather see efforts put toward collapsible package >> categorization than simple filtering. > > As mentioned in an earlier message, I'd like to see such categorization > added, indeed. But note that what the OP asks for is slightly > different, in that it depends on the user's own preferences. > > Maybe the categorization can reduce the need for the OP's feature. > And of course, maybe the two can be merged by letting the user add her > own categorization data (such as an "uninteresting" tag). > > > Stefan >