[gentoo-dev] shouldn't eselect be in app-eselect ?

[gentoo-dev] shouldn't eselect be in app-eselect ?

[Philip Webb]

I read the recent thread re the new app-eselect.
Doing my weekly system update,
it strikes me that 'eselect' itself sb there too.

Time to paint the bikesheds again ... (smile)

-- 
========================,,============================================
SUPPORT     ___________//___,   Philip Webb
ELECTRIC   /] [] [] [] [] []|   Cities Centre, University of Toronto
TRANSIT    `-O----------O---'   purslowatchassdotutorontodotca

Re: [gentoo-dev] shouldn't eselect be in app-eselect ?

[Alex Brandt]

On Saturday, April 04, 2015 14:41:37 Philip Webb wrote:
> I read the recent thread re the new app-eselect.
> Doing my weekly system update,
> it strikes me that 'eselect' itself sb there too.
> 
> Time to paint the bikesheds again ... (smile)

I don't disagree but will simply point out that if this becomes true, we 
should also move dev-lang/python to dev-python, dev-lang/ruby to dev-ruby, and 
dev-lang/perl to dev-perl (not an exhaustive list).

Regards,

-- 
Alex Brandt
Cloud Evangelist for Rackspace and Developer for Gentoo
http://blog.alunduil.com

Re: [gentoo-dev] shouldn't eselect be in app-eselect ?

[Michael Orlitzky]

On 04/04/2015 02:41 PM, Philip Webb wrote:
> I read the recent thread re the new app-eselect.
> Doing my weekly system update,
> it strikes me that 'eselect' itself sb there too.
> 
> Time to paint the bikesheds again ... (smile)
> 

This is consistent with a lot of other stuff. For example, emacs is
under app-editors, while all of its "accessories" go under app-emacs.
Likewise for www-servers/apache and www-apache/foo.

You can argue either way, but one way creates a lot more work...

Re: [gentoo-dev] shouldn't eselect be in app-eselect ?

[Michał Górny]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 678 bytes --]

Dnia 2015-04-04, o godz. 13:47:47
Alex Brandt <alunduil@gentoo.org> napisał(a):

> On Saturday, April 04, 2015 14:41:37 Philip Webb wrote:
> > I read the recent thread re the new app-eselect.
> > Doing my weekly system update,
> > it strikes me that 'eselect' itself sb there too.
> > 
> > Time to paint the bikesheds again ... (smile)
> 
> I don't disagree but will simply point out that if this becomes true, we 
> should also move dev-lang/python to dev-python, dev-lang/ruby to dev-ruby, and 
> dev-lang/perl to dev-perl (not an exhaustive list).

Portage to app-portage/, web browsers with plugins to www-plugins/...


-- 
Best regards,
Michał Górny

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 949 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] shouldn't eselect be in app-eselect ?

[Gordon Pettey]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 586 bytes --]

On Sat, Apr 4, 2015 at 1:49 PM, Michał Górny <mgorny@gentoo.org> wrote:

> Dnia 2015-04-04, o godz. 13:47:47
> Alex Brandt <alunduil@gentoo.org> napisał(a):
> > I don't disagree but will simply point out that if this becomes true, we
> > should also move dev-lang/python to dev-python, dev-lang/ruby to
> dev-ruby, and
> > dev-lang/perl to dev-perl (not an exhaustive list).
>
> Portage to app-portage/, web browsers with plugins to www-plugins/...
>

That doesn't fit. Ruby is Ruby, Python is Python, vim is vim, and emacs is
emacs, but a web browser is not a plugin.

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1049 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] shouldn't eselect be in app-eselect ?

[Philip Webb]

150404 Alex Brandt wrote:
> On Saturday, April 04, 2015 14:41:37 Philip Webb wrote:
>> I read the recent thread re the new app-eselect.
>> Doing my weekly system update,
>> it strikes me that 'eselect' itself sb there too.
>> Time to paint the bikesheds again ... (smile)
> I don't disagree but will simply point out that if this becomes true,
> we should also move dev-lang/python to dev-python,
> dev-lang/ruby to dev-ruby & dev-lang/perl to dev-perl (not exhaustive).

No (and to the other objectors' lists):
there are many computer languages, but there is only  1  'eselect'.
The eselect set-up is unique within Gentoo,
which makes it natural to put it all under  1  category.

-- 
========================,,============================================
SUPPORT     ___________//___,   Philip Webb
ELECTRIC   /] [] [] [] [] []|   Cities Centre, University of Toronto
TRANSIT    `-O----------O---'   purslowatchassdotutorontodotca

Re: [gentoo-dev] shouldn't eselect be in app-eselect ?

[Ulrich Mueller]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1436 bytes --]

>>>>> On Sat, 4 Apr 2015, Philip Webb wrote:

> 150404 Alex Brandt wrote:
>> On Saturday, April 04, 2015 14:41:37 Philip Webb wrote:
>>> I read the recent thread re the new app-eselect.
>>> Doing my weekly system update,
>>> it strikes me that 'eselect' itself sb there too.
>>> Time to paint the bikesheds again ... (smile)
>> I don't disagree but will simply point out that if this becomes
>> true, we should also move dev-lang/python to dev-python,
>> dev-lang/ruby to dev-ruby & dev-lang/perl to dev-perl (not
>> exhaustive).

> No (and to the other objectors' lists):
> there are many computer languages, but there is only  1  'eselect'.
> The eselect set-up is unique within Gentoo,
> which makes it natural to put it all under  1  category.

eselect is an administration tool, therefore it goes into the
app-admin category, together with other administration tools. 

That the main application goes into a generic category is a pattern
that we have used for many years. Other examples, apart from
programming languages, include app-editors/emacs vs app-emacs/*,
app-editors/vim vs app-vim/*, and app-text/texlive vs dev-texlive/*.

That said, this discussion is rather pointless now. The package move
was done in the way it was announced [1], and I'm not going to touch
all packages another time to update their dependency on eselect.

Ulrich


[1] https://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-dev/message/fff06b1f1b36e96d5e3ba134b2101de5

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 490 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] shouldn't eselect be in app-eselect ?

[Jason Zaman]

On Sat, Apr 04, 2015 at 08:49:51PM +0200, Michał Górny wrote:
> Dnia 2015-04-04, o godz. 13:47:47
> Alex Brandt <alunduil@gentoo.org> napisał(a):
> 
> > On Saturday, April 04, 2015 14:41:37 Philip Webb wrote:
> > > I read the recent thread re the new app-eselect.
> > > Doing my weekly system update,
> > > it strikes me that 'eselect' itself sb there too.
> > > 
> > > Time to paint the bikesheds again ... (smile)
> > 
> > I don't disagree but will simply point out that if this becomes true, we 
> > should also move dev-lang/python to dev-python, dev-lang/ruby to dev-ruby, and 
> > dev-lang/perl to dev-perl (not an exhaustive list).
> 
> Portage to app-portage/, web browsers with plugins to www-plugins/...

also, dev-java/oracle-jdk-bin, dev-java/icedtea ...

> 
> -- 
> Best regards,
> Michał Górny

Re: [gentoo-dev] shouldn't eselect be in app-eselect ?

[Alexander Berntsen]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

On 04/04/15 20:41, Philip Webb wrote:
> I read the recent thread re the new app-eselect. Doing my weekly
> system update, it strikes me that 'eselect' itself sb there too.
- -1.
- -- 
Alexander
bernalex@gentoo.org
https://secure.plaimi.net/~alexander
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2

iF4EAREIAAYFAlUn7E8ACgkQRtClrXBQc7UObAD/XqDrTYtqVvWrXebtBKUwP4zS
6OToHBbRiOYkuNFGP6IA/15AOFbF4Lsv7M52XTUxCuT7eVPC0C8QPQBZ2PDFc5/S
=zqli
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----