On Fri, Mar 07, 2003 at 02:48:52PM +0100, goran.hultgren at bluefish.se wrote:
> 
> So, to get practical - should we introduce these three as Categories in
> SM? I would think so.
> And then of course a fourth is needed - "extra" or "other" or something.
> And should this category be mandatory?
> Probably. I will wait and see what people say and then we could perhaps
> write these categories down. You know, nail the name and a oneline
> description plus a URL to a Swiki page that explains it further. (Yep,
> each category can actually have a URL associated that explains it in
> detail, I have only used it here and there).
> 
> And of course, I would like more help in maintaining the SM category
> tree. If anyone has ideas I would like to hear them.

Hi Goran,

It would be nice to have a category on SM for plugins. For example, the
plugin for OSProcess is currently just part of the OSProcess package, but
from the point of view of a VM builder, it would make more sense if I
split out an OSPP package for the plugin, and registered in on SM in
a category for plugins. If you add a "kernel" category, that would
probably be the right place for it, maybe as a "plugins" subcategory.

I suppose that the kernel modules in a Linux distribution are a good
analogy, so Debian may provide some guidance here too.

Dave