| 1 |
On Mon, Jul 7, 2008 at 8:51 PM, Joe Peterson <lavajoe@g.o> wrote: |
| 2 |
> Donnie Berkholz wrote: |
| 3 |
>> I actually object to having crap in dev-python, because things should be |
| 4 |
>> categorized functionally instead of by the language they're implemented |
| 5 |
>> in. 90% of the time you don't care about the language. But category |
| 6 |
>> moves are pretty much pointless, so I don't normally bring it up. |
| 7 |
> |
| 8 |
> Do you mean it is pointless because categories are pointless, or because |
| 9 |
> it is not worth the trouble of doing the move? I assume we inherited |
| 10 |
> the category idea from fbsd ports. |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
It is pointless because we should probably have tags; not categories. |
| 13 |
It is akin to the Section[1] header in a debian control file. |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
[1] http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-archive.html#s-subsections |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
> |
| 18 |
> Since we have categories (and assuming we'll keep them), I think that |
| 19 |
> things should be categorized as correctly as possible (perhaps it's not |
| 20 |
> the highest priority, but better to have it right than not, eventually). |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
Have you moved a package between categories before? |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
It is not simple to do correctly which is why no one likes to do them |
| 25 |
unless they |
| 26 |
are 'necessary'. |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
'epkgmove' invokes bad memories for many ;) |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
> |
| 31 |
> If it is better to have scipy in sci-libs rather dev-python, then |
| 32 |
> perhaps other dev-python packages (like you said) should be moved |
| 33 |
> elsewhere to be consistent. A quick look at the fbsd ports shows that |
| 34 |
> scipy is in "science" and numpy is in "math" (for example), so that |
| 35 |
> agrees with your feeling that neither belong in dev-python. |
| 36 |
> |
| 37 |
> -Joe |
| 38 |
> -- |
| 39 |
> gentoo-dev@l.g.o mailing list |
| 40 |
> |
| 41 |
> |
| 42 |
-- |
| 43 |
gentoo-dev@l.g.o mailing list |
Archives