Public SourceMage Discussion List

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

On Wed, Feb 23, 2005 at 09:02:40AM -0600, Jeremy Blosser wrote:
> On Feb 23, Flavien Bridault [f.bridault AT fra.net] wrote:
> > Le Mercredi 23 F?vrier 2005 01:29, Jeremy Blosser a ?crit :
> > > Comments/suggestions/name changes/hate mail welcome.
> > 
> > I love these new sections :) I think we should do as well fo others big 
> > sections.
> 
> Yes, if people like this kind of division it would make sense to do the
> rest in the same kind of scheme as well.  I can work on this if Arwed/etc.
> wants, but I know it isn't on the current priorities list...

I thought about that too, I will split the video section in a similar
way the audio stuff is split soon. For section maintainers it's
basically their decision what to do with their section, but of course it
would be nicer if we can agree on a general scheme for this.

> > 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.
> 
> They could probably go in the "system" section I suggested.
> 
> > 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.
> 
> Subsections would be nice if they are possible, but that may be too much
> change to do all at once (I assume it would mean changes to sorcery).

I'm not too fond of the idea of subsections. Divisions like
<primaryName-subName> is easier to handle imo.

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