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 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1FuwFs-0004RV-O9 for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Mon, 26 Jun 2006 18:56:17 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.7/8.13.6) with SMTP id k5QIr4Wj015574; Mon, 26 Jun 2006 18:53:04 GMT Received: from platinum.cryos.net (platinum.cryos.net [195.242.214.61]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.7/8.13.6) with ESMTP id k5QIqoSH031974; Mon, 26 Jun 2006 18:52:50 GMT Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by platinum.cryos.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id E3037C080E; Mon, 26 Jun 2006 19:52:49 +0100 (BST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at cryos.net Received: from platinum.cryos.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (platinum.cryos.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id B69yP0417FXl; Mon, 26 Jun 2006 19:52:47 +0100 (BST) Received: from ns0.cryos.net (ns0.cryos.net [217.155.144.221]) (using SSLv3 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by platinum.cryos.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3DAAD698AC; Mon, 26 Jun 2006 19:52:47 +0100 (BST) From: "Marcus D. Hanwell" To: gentoo-science@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-science] Scientific Gentoo reorg: the proposal Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2006 19:52:43 +0100 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.3 Cc: George Shapovalov , gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org References: <200606252046.03386.george@gentoo.org> In-Reply-To: <200606252046.03386.george@gentoo.org> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-science@gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-science@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="nextPart1996927.O0XY8FHzje"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <200606261952.46515.cryos@gentoo.org> X-Archives-Salt: efe17848-cc1e-4419-800d-1de997bfc498 X-Archives-Hash: 40401d44223ef8c7d3da85b39fc25b0f --nextPart1996927.O0XY8FHzje Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline On Sunday 25 June 2006 19:46, George Shapovalov wrote: > First, thanks to everybody who responded! (not that tehre were many ;)). > Interestingly, the most positive result so far seems to be two people > expressing interest to join :), so we need at least one more mentor I'd > say.. Sorry about not responding until now - really busy in real life. I am=20 currently in the thesis write up and job hunting stage of my PhD with three= =20 months of funding left - so my Gentoo time may well be fairly limited durin= g=20 the next few months. I will do what I can as and when though. > > I'll start by refreshing general changes that were proposed: > > 1. Make Scientific Gentoo a top-level and create subprojects > - this did not seem to get any complaints. So, when we are done with the > mainpart I'll try to update the page, like move it to a proper location, > redo the blurb and provide links to subprojects. Then I'll ask > corresponding teams to produce some descriptions for the corresponding > subprojects (its the same .xml essentially, just change the description > paraagraph). But lets first get done with the reorg itself.. This sounds good to me. I think this will certainly be a positive move for = the=20 work done with scientific applications in Gentoo. > > 2. Create smaller, topical herds to split 316 packages we have under sci > right now. > - Looks like most people assumed a natural herding of packages by > categories (of course sci-libs should not be a separate herd, packages > under it should fall under whatever makes sense), so lets try to start by > creating a layout that follows. Here are the categories, as they stand no= w: > > Further is based on a quick glance at ChangeLog's (since I did not get mu= ch > responce from actual mainatiners ;), so I may have missed somebody/listed > somebody extra. Please check and comment accordingly) Commented in your tracker bug on my involvement - all sounds quite reasonab= le=20 to me. Although I would hate to dilute down too much and end up with one=20 developer herds as they are not very productive in general. > > There were talks about creating sci-physics category, however I cannot fi= nd > traces of that atm (or was it on irc?). If there really are apps for > sci-physics it can start combined with sci-astronomy (or not, need a list > of packages..) I would go either way - crystallography and structural packages are also qu= ite=20 physicsy depending upon your perspective... > > Any comments on the structure? Also, while sci-xxx is a "natural" name for > the category (considering our present layout) it is somewhat cumbersome f= or > the herd. I guess sci- part may be dropped, then, should the rest stay > spelled out or people would prefere shortcuts, like math for mathematics, > etc? I would personally favour dropping the sci- and going for shortened names s= uch=20 as maths/math, geo. If there is a great deal of opposition I don't think it= =20 matters too much though. Back to work anyway... I am usually around on IRC too if anyone wants to ch= at=20 about this stuff. It is a manic week this week though, so may be not so muc= h. Thanks, Marcus --nextPart1996927.O0XY8FHzje Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.3 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQBEoCz+zgRsaX1BF70RAoEjAKCCPpf5Lgat4xcMSdMYqR2uxLEAUwCdEups sWqXlJu40DtIETj9uMsQXiA= =iVpI -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --nextPart1996927.O0XY8FHzje-- -- gentoo-science@gentoo.org mailing list