Public SourceMage Discussion List

[Arwed von Merkatz <v.merkatz AT gmx.net>]

On Tue, Feb 22, 2005 at 11:56:44AM -0600, Jeremy Blosser wrote:
> On Feb 22, Eric Sandall [eric AT sandall.us] wrote:
> > Quoting Thomas Houssin <thomas.houssin AT gmail.com>:
> > <snip>
> > > So we have several ideas to split the utils section :
> > >...
> > > Does this seems a good idea to everybody ? Other ideas ?
> 
> I actually started yesterday on a full list of new sections out of
> utils+shell-term-fm.  I think I'm 2/3 of the way there.

Great, thanks :)

> > Looks fine to me, though utils looks like it'll still be a catch-all and
> > rather large while some of the sections (admintools, don't have spaces in
> > section names ;)) will be fairly small. Do we have problems with small
> > sections? Are there any other items we can/will add to the admintools
> > section?

I think we can live with many small sections. As long as they stay small
one guru can easily maintain several of them, if they get bigger it can
be split among several gurus.
With smaller sections it would probably also be easier to find people
willing to maintain a section. Currently some sections like libs and
utils are so big they scare away any possibly volunteers ;)

> The list I'm working on now does not have a "utils" section anymore.  It
> has quite a few sections, some of which are rather small at the moment...
> my thought is to just categorize everything however makes sense, then send
> it to the list for discussion with the assumption some of the smaller ones
> can get recombined.
> 
> I'll try to send a full draft out tomorrow night; if I don't have it done
> by then I'll just send whatever I have.

-- 
Arwed v. Merkatz                              Source Mage GNU/Linux developer
                                                    http://www.sourcemage.org