From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: swedebugia Subject: Re: Re-approaching package tagging Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2018 08:42:24 +0100 Message-ID: <8622fccd-52f3-bd5e-6f3e-2cb460f4430d@riseup.net> References: <875zvsq8ov.fsf@dustycloud.org> <261b0ff4-53f8-6c54-1d3e-4e0ed8128d91@riseup.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:37894) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gZWOh-0007hF-6O for guix-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 19 Dec 2018 02:36:04 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gZWOd-0004L6-LL for guix-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 19 Dec 2018 02:36:03 -0500 Received: from mx1.riseup.net ([198.252.153.129]:35463) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gZWOb-0004JL-84 for guix-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 19 Dec 2018 02:35:57 -0500 Received: from cotinga.riseup.net (cotinga-pn.riseup.net [10.0.1.164]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "*.riseup.net", Issuer "COMODO RSA Domain Validation Secure Server CA" (verified OK)) by mx1.riseup.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9C8BD1A0443 for ; Tue, 18 Dec 2018 23:35:55 -0800 (PST) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cotinga.riseup.net with ESMTPSA id D73FC104395 for ; Tue, 18 Dec 2018 23:35:54 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <261b0ff4-53f8-6c54-1d3e-4e0ed8128d91@riseup.net> Content-Language: en-US List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: "Guix-devel" To: guix-devel@gnu.org On 2018-12-19 07:51, swedebugia wrote: > On 2018-12-18 08:48, Catonano wrote: >> >> >> Il giorno lun 17 dic 2018 alle ore 22:10 swedebugia=20 >> > ha scritto: >> >> =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 Hi :) >> >> =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 On 2018-12-17 20:01, Christopher Lemmer Webber wrot= e: >> =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 > Hello, >> =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 > >> =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 > In the past when we've discussed package ta= gging, I think Ludo' >> =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 has been >> =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 > against it, primarily because it's a giant = source of=20 >> bikeshedding.=C2=A0 I >> =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 > agree that it's a huge space for bikesheddi= ng... no space >> =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 provides more >> =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 > bikeshedding than naming things, and taggin= g things is a many=20 >> to many >> =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 > naming system. >> =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 > >> =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 > However, I will say that finding packages b= ased on topical >> =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 interest is >> =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 > pretty hard right now.=C2=A0 If I want to f= ind all the available >> =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 roguelikes: >> =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 > >> =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 > cwebber@jasmine:~$ guix package -A rogue >> =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 > hyperrogue=C2=A0 =C2=A0 10.5=C2=A0 =C2=A0 o= ut=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0gnu/packages/games.scm:3652:2 >> =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 > roguebox-adventures=C2=A0 =C2=A02.2.1=C2=A0= =C2=A0out =20 >> =C2=A0gnu/packages/games.scm:1047:2 >> =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 > >> =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 > Hm, that's strange, there's definitely more= roguelikes that >> =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 should show >> =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 > up than that!=C2=A0 A more specific search = is even worse: >> =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 > >> =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 > cwebber@jasmine:~$ guix package -A roguelik= e >> =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 > cwebber@jasmine:~$ >> =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 > >> =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 > What I should have gotten back: >> =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 >=C2=A0 =C2=A0- angband >> =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 >=C2=A0 =C2=A0- cataclysm-dda >> =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 >=C2=A0 =C2=A0- crawl >> =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 >=C2=A0 =C2=A0- crawl-tiles >> =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 >=C2=A0 =C2=A0- hyperrogue >> =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 >=C2=A0 =C2=A0- nethack >> =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 >=C2=A0 =C2=A0- roguebox-adventures >> =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 >=C2=A0 =C2=A0- tome4 >> =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 > >> =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 > So I only got 1/4 of the entries I was inte= rested in in my first >> =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 query. >> =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 > Too bad! >> =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 > >> =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 > I get that we're opening up space for bikes= hedding and *that's=20 >> true*. >> =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 > But it seems like not doing so makes things= hard on users. >> =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 > >> =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 > What do you think?=C2=A0 Is there a way to = open the (pandora's?) box >> =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 of tags >> =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 > safely? >> >> =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 Yes and no. >> >> =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 Pjotr and I have discussed this relating to biotech= software. He said >> =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 that many scientists have a hard time finding the r= ight tools for >> =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 the job. >> >> =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 I proposed tight integration with wikidata[1] (ever= y software in the >> =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 world will eventually have an item there) and Guix = (QID on every >> =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 package >> =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 and lookup/catogory integration) and leave all the = categorizing to >> =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 them. >> =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 Ha problem sidestepped, they are bikeshedding exper= ts over there in >> =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 wikiland! :D >> >> =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 The advantage of this is that everyone using wikida= ta (every package >> =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 manager) could pull the same categorization so we o= nly do it once=20 >> in a >> =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 central >> >> =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 What do you think? >> >> =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 -- >> >> >> There is also the Free Software Directory >> https://directory.fsf.org/wiki/Main_Page >> >> I don't know what the relationship between Wikidata and the FSD is >> >> Does Wikidata import data from the FSD ? Or viceversa ? >> >=20 > I don't know. For now at least they keep reference to the FSD on=20 > software-entries that exists in the FSD. >=20 > We could integrate the FSD also but I have yet to investigate if they=20 > provide an API for their entries. >=20 > Anyways I view FSD as a subset of Wikidata/Wikipedia. Wikidata is the=20 > node and FSD the leaf. Wikidata/Wikipedia will probably within a few=20 > years contain the data or links to the data that now exists in the FSD. >=20 > Correct me if I'm wrong but the only advantage of FSD over Wikidata &=20 > Wikipedia is that they do not include references to proprietary softwar= e=20 > at all. >=20 > In my view it is more feasible to compile the information on in a=20 > structured way in central node and then pull the relevant bits to the l= eaf. >=20 > E.g. FSD of the future could be generated from all wikidata-entries and= =20 > extracts of wikipedia that are an instance of=20 > https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q341. This would avoid fragmentation and=20 > help concentrate on building a large shared collective source of all=20 > knowledge within the wiki-community. FSD could exist anyhow and surely=20 > help enrich the upstream data. >=20 > Similarly we could generate a wikipedia subset without any entries=20 > pointing to (evil) private corporations (any entries that is part of=20 > https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q5621421 or whatever). I can't imagine=20 > what this would be good for but it its possible. >=20 > I cannot imagine that the information in FSD would not be accepted in=20 > any of the wikimedia projects. I could be wrong though as I honestly di= d=20 > not visit or study the FSD very much. >=20 Also the license of the FSD (GFDL 1.2) differs from both Wikidata (CC0)=20 and Wikipedia (CC-BY-SA 4.0 + GFDL 1.2). This is not to their advantage in the long run. I fear the FSD is already becoming unmaintained and obsolete with people=20 favoring more open and smarter solutions from the wikimedia-projects (at=20 least I am). When it comes to completeness we have at least 500.000 packages missing=20 in both Wikidata and FSD (450.000+ MIT & CC0 licensed npm packages).=20 Would any of you like to import those twice? I don't and as I see it=20 Wikidata is far superior in multiple ways to get the job done and do it=20 well with a big community backing it up with tools, bots, manual edits,=20 et all. Who wants to update with new versions in two places when we have=20 over half a million free software packages to juggle? Here is a small comparison example: Top 8 JS packages according to=20 https://github.com/search?o=3Ddesc&q=3Djs&s=3Dstars&type=3DRepositories=20 (900.000+ repositories in total!) (i filtered out a few non softwares) 1. angular.js https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q28925578 https://directory.fsf.org/wiki/Angular2 2. node https://directory.fsf.org/wiki/Node#tab=3DOverview https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q756100 3. axios not found in either 4. three.js https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q3525922 https://directory.fsf.org/wiki/Three.js 5. socket.io https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q7552998 not found (poor search function in my view) 6. reveal.js not found not found 7. chart.js not found not found 8. json-server not found not found Wikidata already contains way more entries and data on the entries I=20 compared (e.g. node, npm, gcc) than FSD despite it being a much younger=20 project. --=20 Cheers Swedebugia