| 1 |
On Saturday 17 September 2005 14:01, Kevin F. Quinn wrote: |
| 2 |
> On 17/9/2005 13:33:30, Christian Parpart (trapni@g.o) wrote: |
| 3 |
> > On Saturday 17 September 2005 11:36, Kevin F. Quinn wrote: |
| 4 |
> > > On 17/9/2005 0:20:57, Mark Loeser (halcy0n@g.o) wrote: |
| 5 |
> > > |
| 6 |
> > > C++ herd is a good idea, especially with that number of packages. |
| 7 |
> > > |
| 8 |
> > > > I would also like to see many of them, if not all, moved to the |
| 9 |
> > > > dev-cpp category: |
| 10 |
> > > |
| 11 |
> > > Is this bit really necessary? |
| 12 |
> > |
| 13 |
> > indeed, it at least helps curious c++ devs to browse through some yet |
| 14 |
> > unknown c++ libs and he maybe finds something useful. |
| 15 |
> |
| 16 |
> If the only gain is that one group finds one search criteria a little |
| 17 |
> easier, then I think that is far from sufficient reason to re-categorise. |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
errr... I didn't meant "of course" == "indeed", I meant it a way of "that |
| 20 |
might make sense". sorry for the misunderstandings ;) |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
Regards, |
| 23 |
Christian. |
Archives