Public SourceMage Discussion List

[Eric Sandall <eric AT sandall.us>]

Quoting Elisamuel Resto <samuel AT dragonboricua.net>:
<snip>
> I agree with your comment about the sections being logical to the   
> user. But the fact
> of the matter is, while the user doesn't *care* about it, *we* do   
> since we maintain
> these spells. If one updates the python build functions, we would   
> need to also
> update any and all spells outside of the section to accomodate...   
> now who is making
> double workload?
>
> There are no set standards, but sensible guidelines on what you   
> should do... if you
> asked.
>
> The thread you referenced to which I saw briefly last year was well   
> discussed, you
> shuld see the ideas/thoughts of most of our *active* developers back  
>  then and I
> assume those have not changed.

Code re-use is preferred, but by no means the ultimate reason for  
where a spell goes. As usual it is up to whomever is doing the work to  
decide, though it is polite to mention on the ML if they're going to  
be moving files around (which both developers did). :)

As for the user-view, there has been talk (and little work) on  
implementing KEYWORDS so that sections will no longer matter to users.  
See  
https://lists.ibiblio.org/sympa/arc/sm-discuss/2005-April/010346.html  
for the beginning of that thread.

I swear there was a list of keywords to use, but I cannot find it  
anymore. Perhaps I am blind. :)

-sandalle

--
Eric Sandall                     |  Source Mage GNU/Linux Developer
eric AT sandall.us PGP: 0xA8EFDD61  |  http://www.sourcemage.org/
http://eric.sandall.us/          |  http://counter.li.org/  #196285