| 1 |
Mike Frysinger wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Saturday 17 September 2005 02:22 pm, Mark Loeser wrote: |
| 3 |
>>The reason for me adding that bit is the metadata from dev-cpp: |
| 4 |
>> |
| 5 |
>>The dev-cpp category contains libraries and utilities relevant to the |
| 6 |
>>c++ programming language. |
| 7 |
>> |
| 8 |
>>Now to me, that means I can find *all* relevant C++ stuff here. If we |
| 9 |
>>don't want that to be the case, maybe we should say "miscellaneous", but |
| 10 |
>>why should something be in dev-libs, as compared with dev-cpp? |
| 11 |
>>net-libs, I could understand, and dev-games, as those could be argued to |
| 12 |
>>have a direct relation. |
| 13 |
> |
| 14 |
> |
| 15 |
> for generic C++ packages (STLport/boost for example), i can see them being in |
| 16 |
> the dev-cpp category ... but for packages which have specific uses already |
| 17 |
> and arent in 'generic' categories, i dont think they should be moved |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
I agree with this, but I think dev-libs and dev-util are generic |
| 20 |
categories, and moving these packages from there would help users in |
| 21 |
finding what they need. I think this is what you are saying atleast :) |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
Mark |
Archives