list-packages: Marking packages as "uninteresting"?

list-packages: Marking packages as "uninteresting"?

[T.V. Raman]

This is mostly a simple feature request:

Right now list-packages presents a giant list of packages, with
available packages listed first -- followed by all the installed
packages.

This also means that every time you bring it up, you end up
looking through packages you've decided are not interesting to
you --- would be possible to add the ability to mark packages as
"uninteresting" and have them bubble down to the bottom of the
list? They'd always be available in the packages buffer and you
could even find them with isearch -- they'd just not clutter up
the list and make it possibly to see what  new packages have
shown up.

Re: list-packages: Marking packages as "uninteresting"?

[Jeremiah Dodds]

"T.V. Raman" <tv.raman.tv@gmail.com> writes:

> This is mostly a simple feature request:
>
> Right now list-packages presents a giant list of packages, with
> available packages listed first -- followed by all the installed
> packages.
>
> This also means that every time you bring it up, you end up
> looking through packages you've decided are not interesting to
> you --- would be possible to add the ability to mark packages as
> "uninteresting" and have them bubble down to the bottom of the
> list? They'd always be available in the packages buffer and you
> could even find them with isearch -- they'd just not clutter up
> the list and make it possibly to see what  new packages have
> shown up.

I'd personally much rather see efforts put toward collapsible package
categorization than simple filtering. If you wanted to go that route
though, there are existing emacs packages that have similar behavior,
gnus off the top of my head.

Re: list-packages: Marking packages as "uninteresting"?

[Stefan Monnier]

> 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

Re: list-packages: Marking packages as "uninteresting"?

[Tim Cross]

I would like to add a +1 for Raman's request. This would be very useful.

It might also be worth having some way to tag what repository a
package is from - help distinguish those which are GNU packages and in
the GNU repository and those which are from some other repository and
which may have different levels of status.

Tim

On 18 May 2012 01:38, Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> 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
>



-- 
Tim Cross

list-packages: Marking packages as "uninteresting"?

[T.V. Raman]

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 <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> 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
>

Re: list-packages: Marking packages as "uninteresting"?

[Jambunathan K]

> 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.
> -- 

The only package that interests me are packages that I have already
installed or packages that are new.

I often use
  M-x customize-changed RET

or use NEWS to "explore" new stuff.  

For example, 
  M-x list-changed-packages RET

could either prompt for a Emacs release or a timestamp and list packages
that were modified in the intervening period.  A PACKAGE-NEWS file could
be introduced which is current archive-contents *together* with the
*-readme.txt.

Or 

There could be a sort option based on create/modify time.  

ps: 

I only wish that timestamps that I see in the below listing

http://elpa.gnu.org/packages/?C=M;O=D

give an idea of when a *particular* package was created/modified as
opposed to when the package *tar* was published.  Save for Org, all
packages have "05-May-2012" has modified date.  This is not that helpful
for discovery.  For example, I would have liked to know when 'csv-mode'
made it's debut.
-- 

Re: list-packages: Marking packages as

[Isaac]

Jambunathan K <kjambunathan <at> gmail.com> writes:

> 
> 
> > Enabling users to add a tag would be the most flexible approach.
> >

I think the same, tag/keyboard/labels should work well

> ps: 
> 
> I only wish that timestamps that I see in the below listing
> 
> http://elpa.gnu.org/packages/?C=M;O=D
> 
> give an idea of when a *particular* package was created/modified as
> opposed to when the package *tar* was published.  Save for Org, all
> packages have "05-May-2012" has modified date.  This is not that helpful
> for discovery.  For example, I would have liked to know when 'csv-mode'
> made it's debut.

One thought is something like the ubuntu store (or vim user feedback) where a 
grade can be assigned by user. I often found myself trying to find 'good 
reviewed' software before trying something out. Instead of using category, we 
may think of using keywords (labels etc)... a wild idea would be something like 
delicious.com, where keywords are contributed socially ...

list-packages: Marking packages as "uninteresting"?

[T.V. Raman]

Good point re customize-changed.
-- 

-- 


On 5/22/12, Jambunathan K <kjambunathan@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> 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.
>> --
>
> The only package that interests me are packages that I have already
> installed or packages that are new.
>
> I often use
>   M-x customize-changed RET
>
> or use NEWS to "explore" new stuff.
>
> For example,
>   M-x list-changed-packages RET
>
> could either prompt for a Emacs release or a timestamp and list packages
> that were modified in the intervening period.  A PACKAGE-NEWS file could
> be introduced which is current archive-contents *together* with the
> *-readme.txt.
>
> Or
>
> There could be a sort option based on create/modify time.
>
> ps:
>
> I only wish that timestamps that I see in the below listing
>
> http://elpa.gnu.org/packages/?C=M;O=D
>
> give an idea of when a *particular* package was created/modified as
> opposed to when the package *tar* was published.  Save for Org, all
> packages have "05-May-2012" has modified date.  This is not that helpful
> for discovery.  For example, I would have liked to know when 'csv-mode'
> made it's debut.
> --
>