Re: [gentoo-science] Scientific Gentoo reorg: the proposal

[George Shapovalov]

Hi C Y

Thanks for comments.

Looks like there are some misconceptions about herds which are understandable 
to devs (whom this reorg concerns primarily), but not that clear to users. 
Since the users are the ones more active in the dscussion, it seems :), I 
think I need to do a bit of explanation.

Basically - herds are the internal organizational stuff, they are not visible 
to users, and developers who maintain stuff deal with them all the time. It 
is a way to traffic bug reports and (internal) correspondence - for example 
most herds have emai laliases setup, that forward all the messages generated 
by bugzilla and other stuff to the relevant devs.. 

неділя, 25. червень 2006 23:23, C Y Ви написали:
> > sci-visualization:  20
> > Ok size, may be combined with -calculators? or -math? (herding, if it
> > makes sense, category should stay), devs:
> > markusle, phosphan, ribosome, cryos, kugelfang, latexer?, j4rg0n?,
> > corsair?, spyderous
>
> I'd say keep this category, personally.
Yes, that's what I said in that smal blurb in parenthesis - may be it makes 
sense to have one herd for two categories, if the packages there are 
maintained by the same people (but this has to be seen first), but we 
shouldn't touch the category. Although that message was probably cryptic to 
the people not dealing with the "internals". I hope above explanation makes 
it more clear. 

> Personally I would rather keep the sci- prefix, just to keep all the
> science related software alphabetically together, but I know that's a
> silly reason.  Out of curosity, how is it cumbersome for the herd?
Oh, they should absolutely stay, as far as categories are concerned. We had 
that discussion when we split (1-tier) sci category into 2-tier categories 
that we have now. Categories in generall will stay the same, only may be few 
of the larger ones will be split again. 

This whole discussion mostly concerns the internal organization of 
maintainance - how the devs deal with them, stuff that is largerly not seen 
from outside. So, you will still be able to browse the packages as now. 
However, as far as herd names are concerned (which users can only see in 
metadata.xml files and which some housekeeping tools may use), having this 
sci- prefix is not as advantageous. Primary "users" of herd names are devs, 
who know what they maintain, and there are not that many of us. On some 
occasions when we need to type herd name (admittedly rare) this may be 
tiresome, and not as nicely looking (maybe). So, basically, I do not feel 
that we have to absolutely keep sci- (in herd names) and we might as well try 
to compress the remainder. However I do not insist either way, - I would like 
to hear here opinions of the "primary users" of herd names - that is 
maintainers who will deal with them..

George

-- 
gentoo-science@g.o mailing list