From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 26931 invoked from network); 26 Jan 2004 18:07:40 +0000 Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (128.193.0.39) by eagle.gentoo.oregonstate.edu with DES-CBC3-SHA encrypted SMTP; 26 Jan 2004 18:07:40 +0000 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([128.193.0.34] helo=eagle.gentoo.org) by smtp.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.24) id 1AlB9A-0005Ot-BP for arch-gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org; Mon, 26 Jan 2004 18:07:40 +0000 Received: (qmail 29256 invoked by uid 50004); 26 Jan 2004 18:07:40 +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 7099 invoked from network); 26 Jan 2004 18:07:40 +0000 X-IMAP-Sender: bfriday FCC: imap://bfriday@mail.lasierra.edu/INBOX/Sent/2004/01 X-Identity-Key: id1 Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2004 10:05:42 -0800 From: Brian Friday Reply-To: bfriday@lasierra.edu X-Mozilla-Draft-Info: internal/draft; vcard=0; receipt=0; uuencode=0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.6b) Gecko/20031205 Thunderbird/0.4 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org References: <20040124215745.GA4315@dev.gentoo.org> <1075108037.13477.11.camel@green> <20040126172638.GA19441@dev.gentoo.org> In-Reply-To: <20040126172638.GA19441@dev.gentoo.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <20040126173655.484C29443A@mail.lasierra.edu> Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] New Portage Category: dev-scheme X-Archives-Salt: 05e8a714-02bf-4b26-8e0e-1a1bdffadf78 X-Archives-Hash: 3e5248211b07b1ee5c338b679cdda46f Just a pipe in from a non-dev, The name "dev-scheme" seems to me to be a little bad mainly because the word scheme is now used so frequently in or as part of the name of applications today. A freshmeat search turned up 136 projects with scheme attached to it (wasn't logged though so maybe this is lower with some filtering). I've honestly never heard of "Scheme" before now so I did a little googling. While my initial google search enlightened me a little more on what "Scheme" you are referring to (search turned up the following, Scheme is a statically scoped and properly tail-recursive dialect of the Lisp programming language invented by Guy Lewis Steele Jr. and Gerald Jay Sussman). Because this lists "Scheme" as a dialect of lisp rather than a completely separate language and add to that the confusion that may arise with the usage of the word scheme in applications today. I would argue there is a pretty good reason to keep any "Scheme" interpreters in lisp even if it is rather tedious. Just my 2 cents, Blake Matheny wrote: > I know this is policy, but in the case where there are several interpreters > available (such is the case of Scheme), might it be more reasonable to put a > popular interpreter in dev-lang, and the rest into dev-scheme? This should > keep clutter in dev-lang to a minimum, and still allow users to easily browse > by their preferred language. What is the thought here? > > -Blake > > > -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list