| 1 |
On 17 January 2013 22:05, Diego Elio Pettenò <flameeyes@×××××××××.eu> wrote: |
| 2 |
> On 17/01/2013 14:57, Ben de Groot wrote: |
| 3 |
>> After some initial bikeshedding we came to the conclusion that naming |
| 4 |
>> the category simply "qt" is the most elegant solution. We will then |
| 5 |
>> also be dropping the qt- prefix in package names. This means |
| 6 |
>> x11-libs/qt-core will be moved to qt/core, and so on. |
| 7 |
> |
| 8 |
> Please don't. Right now we have only one category which is not foo-bar |
| 9 |
> and that's virtual... I'm pretty sure it's going to break some |
| 10 |
> assumption to change that... |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
But is there any reason other than "assumption" to stick to foo-bar |
| 13 |
category names? |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
One alternative we did come up with is qt-framework, since that is |
| 16 |
what upstream also uses (though mostly it's plain Qt), since it's a |
| 17 |
collection of libraries and applications. |
| 18 |
-- |
| 19 |
Cheers, |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
Ben | yngwin |
| 22 |
Gentoo developer |
| 23 |
Gentoo Qt project lead, Gentoo Wiki admin |
Archives