On Wed, 2005-02-23 at 19:00 +0000, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > sys-storage: or move stuff to sys-fs?
If we go how sys-fs looks now, mdadm should go to sys-fs as well, as raidtools, lvm, evms, etc are there already. Also, some things are a bit vague, like hdparm might rather go to sys-hardware. A thought might be to move all these (except hdparm, etc), as well as sys-fs to sys-storage rather. If we really go by sys-fs means to me at least, it probably should only be the fsck's, and devfs/udev that stay there if any. > sys-network: or move stuff to net-*? You might consider them more critical to get the system up, so more system related? > sys-hardware: other hardware related apps (maybe splittable further?) I at least cannot think of 2/4 more meaningful categories for these, as they are fairly diverse. > Regarding sys-bsd... When the *bsd folks get their thing working, we're > going to end up with a fair number of bsdish things in the tree. Since > sys-apps is too frickin' huge, would sys-bsd make sense? > Like spb said - you cannot really group them, as what each contain is very diverse, so I think it should be fine. -- Martin Schlemmer Gentoo Linux Developer, Desktop/System Team Developer Cape Town, South Africa
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
