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: Duane Malcolm <d.malcolm AT auckland.ac.nz>
  • To: Arwed von Merkatz <v.merkatz AT gmx.net>
  • Cc: sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
  • Subject: Re: [SM-Discuss] New sections [Was: New archive and perl-cpan maintainer]
  • Date: Thu, 24 Feb 2005 08:45:45 +1300

Arwed von Merkatz wrote:
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.

I was thinking the categories that Freshmeat or Sourceforge might help or be a guide. I'm thinking of using their categories for the science section. I noticed they don't have a usually separate libraries into a separate category. I also noticed a program can be part of many sections, or in their terms "topics". Would it be reasonable to have a flag in the DETAILS file called "TOPIC" or "CATEGORY". Just thinking out loud.

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.
I like the idea of subsections, especially when we get a lot of sections. However, I understand this is not crucial at this stage.

I notice a lot of features requested on the mailing list, these should be added to the wishlist on the wiki and ranked with something like "easy", "medium", and "hard" and "nice", "improvement" and "critical" or something along those lines. Similar to the way bzflag and abiword document their requests.

Duane




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page