| 1 |
On Saturday 17 September 2005 22:24, Mark Loeser wrote: |
| 2 |
> Mike Frysinger wrote: |
| 3 |
> > On Saturday 17 September 2005 02:22 pm, Mark Loeser wrote: |
| 4 |
> >>The reason for me adding that bit is the metadata from dev-cpp: |
| 5 |
> >> |
| 6 |
> >>The dev-cpp category contains libraries and utilities relevant to the |
| 7 |
> >>c++ programming language. |
| 8 |
> >> |
| 9 |
> >>Now to me, that means I can find *all* relevant C++ stuff here. If |
| 10 |
> >> we don't want that to be the case, maybe we should say |
| 11 |
> >> "miscellaneous", but why should something be in dev-libs, as |
| 12 |
> >> compared with dev-cpp? net-libs, I could understand, and dev-games, |
| 13 |
> >> as those could be argued to have a direct relation. |
| 14 |
> > |
| 15 |
> > for generic C++ packages (STLport/boost for example), i can see them |
| 16 |
> > being in the dev-cpp category ... but for packages which have |
| 17 |
> > specific uses already and arent in 'generic' categories, i dont think |
| 18 |
> > they should be moved |
| 19 |
> |
| 20 |
> I agree with this, but I think dev-libs and dev-util are generic |
| 21 |
> categories, and moving these packages from there would help users in |
| 22 |
> finding what they need. I think this is what you are saying atleast :) |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
I think that dev-util is a very specific category containing development |
| 25 |
utilities of some sort. There might be some misclassifications in them, |
| 26 |
but from a user perspective I don't really care about the language |
| 27 |
anything is written in. As C++ is so widespread I don't think that |
| 28 |
anything but app-misc or the like should be moved into a dev-cpp |
| 29 |
category. |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
Paul |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
-- |
| 34 |
Paul de Vrieze |
| 35 |
Gentoo Developer |
| 36 |
Mail: pauldv@g.o |
| 37 |
Homepage: http://www.devrieze.net |
Archives