Public SourceMage Discussion List

[Eric Sandall <eric AT sandall.us>]

Ladislav Hagara wrote:
> Hi,
> what do you think about it, especially Eric?
> Personally I am happy with only one e section. I do not need more e 
> sections.
> Imho, to have more e sections is useless.
> Of course if you prefer it, np.
>
> If anybody wants to update e spells do not hesitate and go ahead. :-)

I kind of like the idea of separating the e16 and e17 packages (with e 
containing packages for both), that way users can easily find the e* 
packages they are looking for.

None of this is for code reuse, of course, which is the main point of 
sections and the keywords would, eventually, take care of this kind of 
organization for us. ;) IMHO it would make it easier when updating 
packages to see what's for e16 and what's for e17 when I'm mucking 
about, but I can also just check DEPENDS for that (extra work, omg!).

> Btw, email crypto AT sourcemage.org was removed, lots of spam.

Yeah, I'm thinking of doing similar with other <section>@sourcemage.org 
aliases as they only get spam, and lots of it. :(

-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