Re: [gentoo-dev] Categorization [was: app-cvs]

[Markus Bertheau <twanger@bluetwanger.de>]

В Пнд, 14.07.2003, в 15:24, Todd Berman пишет:
> Just in general, app-cvs is a 'BAD' idea.
> 
> It defeats the *entire* purpose of what is going on in general.
> 
> In general, baring notable exceptions (gaim-cvs, private live-cvs pull
> ebuilds) I dont think live-cvs ebuilds are a good idea at all, and
> surely not a sound reason to add a category just for their use.
> 
Also as a related issue packages can be categorized in many ways and
often packages would belong to more that one category. To be consistent
we should use the same "categorization scheme" for every package. An
example:

nurbs++ is a C++ library, and it's in media-libs, I'm totally fine with
that. Then we have libxmlpp, which is a C++ wrapper to the C libxml (I
think), in dev-cpp. Given that I find nurbs++ in media-libs, I'd expect
to find libxmlpp in dev-libs. We don't put nurbs++ in dev-cpp just
because it's a C++ library.

Now the difference between nurbs++ and libxmlpp is, that libxmlpp is a
C++ wrapper, and nurbs++ is not, it's "natively" C++. But in my opinion
that doesn't justify putting it in a "C++ libraries" directory. After
all I don't think "Hmm, I'm writing a C++ application, let's look in
dev-cpp what library I could use", but rather "Hmm, I'm writing a
multimedia application, let's look in media-libs if there's already a
library doing half of my work".

-- 
Markus Bertheau.
Berlin, Berlin.
Germany.

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list