Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

sm-discuss - Re: [SM-Discuss] New sections [Was: New archive and perl-cpan maintainer]

sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Public SourceMage Discussion List

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Flavien Bridault <f.bridault AT fra.net>
  • To: sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
  • Subject: Re: [SM-Discuss] New sections [Was: New archive and perl-cpan maintainer]
  • Date: Wed, 23 Feb 2005 09:39:56 +0100

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




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page