Public SourceMage Discussion List

[Elisamuel Resto <samuel AT dragonboricua.net>]

On Thu, 17 Jan 2008 12:26:54 -0800, Eric Sandall wrote:
> 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
> 

If I recall correctly, I heard from Jaka (lynxlynxlynx) that this was pending 
a set
of default keyword names and that most (if not all) of the code was in 
sorcery.


-- 
Elisamuel Resto <samuel AT dragonboricua.net>
Source Mage GNU/Linux / http://www.sourcemage.org
ID: 0x18615F19 / FP: B66D 1C2A E8EE B922 1D9C D98F D2D5 FB61 1861 5F19

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature