Public SourceMage Discussion List

[Flavien Bridault <f.bridault AT fra.net>]

Le Mercredi 23 Février 2005 01:29, Jeremy Blosser a écrit :
> On Feb 22, Arwed von Merkatz [v.merkatz AT gmx.net] wrote:
> > On Tue, Feb 22, 2005 at 11:56:44AM -0600, Jeremy Blosser wrote:
> > > 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 :)
> >
> > > On Feb 22, Eric Sandall [eric AT sandall.us] wrote:
> > > > 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 ;)
>
> Well, I'm glad you think that way, because a lot of smaller sections is
> what I came up with.  :-)  I agree with you, though, more sections means
> easier maintenance.
>
> The first draft of what I'd suggest is attached.  This is just me running
> through the "utils" and "shell-term-fm" sections (in test) and splitting
> them up into the categories that seemed to make sense.  I didn't worry
> about sections being too small to make this list, so maybe we'll want to
> recombine some of them.  This hopefully gives us a place to start talking,
> though.
>
> Some notes:
> - Test currently is broken down into 58 sections, with the following size
>   breakdown:
>     1-25 spells: 16 sections
>    26-50 spells: 18 sections <- shell-term-fm now
>    51-75 spells:  9 sections
>    76-100 spells: 5 sections
>   101-200 spells: 9 sections <- utils now
>   over 200 spells: 1 section
>
>   The proposed would give us a total of 58-2+17=73 sections, with the new
>   sections having the following initial sizes: 2, 4, 4, 4, 5, 7, 7, 7, 7,
>   9, 9, 11, 14, 16, 18, 19, 24.  So, they still aren't all *that* small,
>   relatively speaking.
>
> - I put a lot of hyphenated names in; to me, this seems a good way to keep
>   similar sections grouped together while still keeping them separate.  In
>   some cases I put [] aren't parts of section names that could be
>   "optional" if people hate the hyphens.  Whatever, if you don't like the
>   names suggest other ones.
>
> - There's no "catch-all" left in this version.  The closest to a catch-all
>   is "shell-apps", but I think even this is clear enough.  If we get a lot
>   of things in there over time we can split them out based on the kind of
>   function they provide, just like we already have mail clients/etc. that
>   would also fit as "shell-apps".
>
> - On this list, I'd definitely be interested in maintaining
>   shell-{script,admin}-utils.  I would also be interested in considering
>   system-{cron,syslog}, shells, and/or [x11-]terms, more or less in that
>   order.  Thomas, let us know what you think of that system-auth section,
>   hopefully it's ok to add some things with PAM.  Anyone else who would be
>   immediately interested in any of these if this is how they were
>   organized?  Knowing that will help a lot in knowing if this is the way to
>   go.
>
> Comments/suggestions/name changes/hate mail welcome.

I love these new sections :) I think we should do as well fo others big 
sections. I agree especially for the boot section, it would be good to 
extract them from disk... I'm ok to maintain this new section. Extracting 
udev and devfsd would also be a good thing, I don't understand why they are 
in disk... They don't manage disks only. But one thing at the time, ok ;-)

Mmmh just a question, would it be possible (technically, p4 ?) to make 
subsections, even sub-subsections ?? It would make the things easier and 
would avoid to have dozens of sections at the same level. As an alternative, 
we can obviously do as usual : prefix the sections to make a kind of 
hierarchy.

-- 
Flavien Bridault
Source Mage GNU/Linux - Disk Guru

IRC : vlaaad
Jabber : vlaaad AT amessage.be

http://www.sourcemage.org

Attachment: pgpmsrRZsH_CQ.pgp
Description: PGP signature