Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Retagging candidates #33

Open
2 of 6 tasks
IzzySoft opened this issue May 22, 2017 · 4 comments
Open
2 of 6 tasks

Retagging candidates #33

IzzySoft opened this issue May 22, 2017 · 4 comments

Comments

@IzzySoft
Copy link
Contributor

IzzySoft commented May 22, 2017

As our "leftovers" are spread across multiple PRs (most of them closed now), let's consolidate them in an issue (which then can be dealt with / closed via another PR):

  • da;Appbrain;http://www.appbrain.com/ (com/appbrain) should probably be:
    ad;AppBrain SDK;https://www.appbrain.com/info/help/sdk/index.html (ref)
  • da;javax; (javax) is much too broad¹
  • da;Mozilla;https://www.mozilla.org/ (org/mozilla) is much too broad¹
  • da;Polidea;https://www.polidea.com/ (pl/polidea) probably too broad as well¹

¹ ref. We should probably "untag" those (emptying the lib and removing the pn) for now, and tag them appropriately once they turn up in a scan and can be properly identified. Some examples for javax I can already provide:

ut;JavaX Dependency Injection;https://docs.oracle.com/javaee/6/api/javax/inject/package-summary.html (javax/inject)
ut;jmDNS library;https://github.com/jmdns/jmdns (javax/jmdns)
ut;JavaX Servlet API;https://www.jcp.org/en/jsr/detail?id=369 (javax/servlet)

The last two are present in our definitions, so I could retag them properly already (leaving unmatched "javax candidates" untagged).

My suggestions are included above – but I want to hear your opinion first, @pkumza 😸 After having decided, we could proceed as with PRs 30..32: I'd do the retagging on the V1 branch, and you later adopt that (migrate my changes) for V2. Deal? Just give me either…

  • a "global OK" (if you agree to all my suggestions)
  • separate OKs for what you agree with, and your alternative suggestion for the remains
  • requests for clarification where things are unclear (and OKs for where I shall start already)

Update: More candidates:

  • com/squareup (tagged pn currently). This prefix is used by a bunch of different libraries like Seismic, Picasso, SQLBrite and more. I've retagged the 2 candidates I was able to identify, and left the remaining alone. We should consider "untagging" them and retagging whenever identified correctly.
  • com/facebook is not just sn. It has a bunch of ut packages as well, like Fresco (ugly to tag, because it has a bunch of separate directories directly below com/facebook), Stetho or Rebound. So we should be careful what we tag sn;Facebook (com/facebook) here (and check the existing tags again). This, too, I have corrected where I encountered a candidate.
@IzzySoft
Copy link
Contributor Author

PS: Just discovered another "group" in our "fallback category": android/content/pm (Android Package Management). That's not really da – but neither ut or anything else existing. I'd suggest sy (System Interface") as a new category. What do you think? Shall I introduce this? I could either include it with my current PR (including the change to Python code), or with a separate PR after you've merged the current one. Just let me know.

@pkumza
Copy link
Owner

pkumza commented May 25, 2017 via email

@IzzySoft
Copy link
Contributor Author

No problem, take your time. As you see, I lied again and continued pushing meanwhile 😸 Just now encountered another "too broad" candidate: com/facebook. That's not only sn (which would apply to the "Facebook SDK"), but also a bunch of utilities – see here. Just retagged one of them, not sure if I walk them all…

@IzzySoft
Copy link
Contributor Author

So what do we do with the remaining candidates, @pkumza ?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants