Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] C++ herd proposal

[Christian Parpart <trapni@gentoo.org>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1460 bytes --]

On Saturday 17 September 2005 22:14, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On Saturday 17 September 2005 02:22 pm, Mark Loeser wrote:
> > Kevin F. Quinn wrote:
> > >> I would also like to see many of them, if not all, moved to the
> > >> dev-cpp category:
> > >
> > > Is this bit really necessary?
> >
> > The reason for me adding that bit is the metadata from dev-cpp:
> >
> > The dev-cpp category contains libraries and utilities relevant to the
> > c++ programming language.
> >
> > Now to me, that means I can find *all* relevant C++ stuff here.  If we
> > don't want that to be the case, maybe we should say "miscellaneous", but
> > why should something be in dev-libs, as compared with dev-cpp?
> > net-libs, I could understand, and dev-games, as those could be argued to
> > have a direct relation.
>
> for generic C++ packages (STLport/boost for example), i can see them being
> in the dev-cpp category ... but for packages which have specific uses
> already and arent in 'generic' categories, i dont think they should be
> moved -mike

if I do understand you correctly, I'd even not use dev-cpp as category, 
instead something that contains the word `platform` or `framework` in it, as 
STLport/boost/STL(libstdc++-v3,...) and others are exactly of that kind.

However, we've some more no-herd'ed packages to put into this new potential 
c++ herd - but these are two different discussions/threads IMHO.

Regards,
Christian Parpart.

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]