I don't know if there's consensus here yet, but it seems like the best thing is to move racket/future/visualizer into a top-level: future-visualizer. Then racket/future/trace will become future-visualizer/trace. If that sounds reasonable, I'll go ahead and move them.
On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 8:03 PM, Robby Findler <ro...@eecs.northwestern.edu>wrote: > On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 3:57 PM, Matthias Felleisen > <matth...@ccs.neu.edu> wrote: > > All I regret is that we have a very shallow structure now, and I think > it would have helped if we had stuck to about a dozen or so categories > after all. > > I think the "modern" experience is that a flat hierarchy (or perhaps > one with foo/test foo/private, etc) plus tagging / searching works > very well. > > So maybe we should try to add some better tagging/searching instead of > trying to some hierarchy in there? > > Robby >
_________________________ Racket Developers list: http://lists.racket-lang.org/dev
