On Fri, Nov 4, 2011 at 1:07 PM, Randy McMurchy <[email protected]> wrote: > > I'd just like to mention that I mildly disagree on both counts, > especially Subversion. For instance, we use Subversion to track > the changes of our own books, which has nothing to do with > programming. I could name other instances where I use Subversion > for tracking changes to things other than programs. > > And yes, you could make a case that TCP Wrappers could belong in > security, but it *is* a networking package. It is all about access > and control of networks. > > Just my thoughts. >
I think I agree with Randy about subversion, it's a project management and version control system (although it is used for programming a lot). the wrappers are useless outside of a networking context but it is definitely security related. I think it could definitely fit in with the security section but it does fit in both sections nicely. It's more of a candidate for relocation if you ask me. While we're on the subject, I noticed recently that cmake is in the system utilities section. It's intended use is as a build system for programming, so it could be argued that it does belong in the programming section. It's a language for describing the build process of languages to compilers. Some packages are tricky to define into categories... Jonathan -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
