From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 19523 invoked by uid 1002); 15 Jul 2003 15:13:40 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gentoo-dev-help@gentoo.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Received: (qmail 15865 invoked from network); 15 Jul 2003 15:13:40 -0000 From: Markus Bertheau To: tberman@gentoo.org Cc: Georgi Georgiev , gentoo-dev@gentoo.org In-Reply-To: <1058189075.12265.3.camel@phaze> References: <3F1296F3.1080101@codewordt.co.uk> <20030714123616.GA6884%chutz@gg3.net> <1058189075.12265.3.camel@phaze> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <1058282017.2635.15.camel@saphir> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.4.3 Date: 15 Jul 2003 17:13:37 +0200 Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Categorization [was: app-cvs] X-Archives-Salt: e45f2d7d-0a4e-43c6-a23f-0f8ab95a2ed3 X-Archives-Hash: b96d10c338969c07380ca0b6dfce1c2a =D0=92 =D0=9F=D0=BD=D0=B4, 14.07.2003, =D0=B2 15:24, Todd Berman =D0=BF=D0= =B8=D1=88=D0=B5=D1=82: > Just in general, app-cvs is a 'BAD' idea. >=20 > It defeats the *entire* purpose of what is going on in general. >=20 > 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. >=20 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". --=20 Markus Bertheau. Berlin, Berlin. Germany. -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list