From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([140.105.134.102] helo=robin.gentoo.org) by nuthatch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1DzqtY-00015D-PS for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Tue, 02 Aug 2005 07:09:01 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.4/8.13.4) with SMTP id j72785Ig009175; Tue, 2 Aug 2005 07:08:05 GMT Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [134.68.220.30]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id j7276OiW005175 for ; Tue, 2 Aug 2005 07:06:25 GMT Received: from 81-179-80-118.dsl.pipex.com ([81.179.80.118] helo=[192.168.1.3]) by smtp.gentoo.org with esmtpa (Exim 4.43) id 1DzqrJ-00081k-D6 for gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org; Tue, 02 Aug 2005 07:06:41 +0000 Message-ID: <42EF1A71.2050007@gentoo.org> Date: Tue, 02 Aug 2005 08:02:09 +0100 From: Ian Leitch User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.6 (X11/20050721) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Modular X plans References: <42EE8C03.3040904@gentoo.org> <42EF0D9A.4070304@gentoo.org> In-Reply-To: <42EF0D9A.4070304@gentoo.org> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.89.5.0 X-Enigmail-Supports: pgp-inline, pgp-mime Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: 0854156c-7b8b-4f8b-a314-e1aed7c3ff91 X-Archives-Hash: 263f8aa929013b8e2badd50ffebe6cc1 Donnie Berkholz wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > Donnie Berkholz wrote: > | The new categories are x11-apps, x11-proto and x11-drivers. Of these, > | the name for x11-proto (the protocol headers) is debatable. The upstream > | module they're all in is called "proto," and their pkg-config (*.pc) > | files are called fooproto. But I'm also open to names such as > | x11-protocol or x11-headers, so let me know what you think makes the > | most sense, both in understanding the meaning and in combination with > | upstream's naming. > > I'm still awaiting any solid arguments against x11-proto, and they had > best be expedited (read below for why). I don't dislike x11-proto, x11-headers is just a little more descriptive from the perspective of an ignorant user. More informed users know that X is the actual protocol, so x11-proto could read to them as "protocol protocols", or "protocols of a protocol". Besides, we have category metadata anyway. Regards, Ian. -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list