Drake Wyrm <wyrm@haell.com> writes:

[...]

> describes its intended contents, I suggest "dev-lispscheme. One
> alternative, just off the top of my head, would be to use "dev-scheme"
> and drop a README in the Portage tree root directory which describes
> what each category is supposed to contain and points to other detailed
> documentation.

Folks, you are making a meal out of this category naming!!!  Haven't
we got more pressing tasks at hand?

dev-scheme and dev-lisp are good enough name spacing.  Once the Scheme
stuff is moved from dev-lisp to dev-scheme, all that remains in
dev-lisp is approximately 100 Common Lisp-related ports and xlispstat
and lush (which are not Scheme or Common Lisp, but have a S-expression
syntax).

At that point, we'll *maybe* create dev-common-lisp and leave
xlispstat and lush in dev-lisp -- but I can't see justifying a
category with only 2 ebuilds in it, so lush and xlispstat will have to
move to dev-lang while dev-lisp would be dropped.  

It is my preference as a maintainer of dev-lisp to leave xlispstat,
lush and all the Common Lisp stuff in dev-lisp and move the scheme
stuff to dev-scheme.

Matt
-- 
Matthew Kennedy
Gentoo Linux Developer