On Sat, 22 Feb 2014 17:16:11 +0100 Dirkjan Ochtman <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 22, 2014 at 12:06 AM, Tom Wijsman <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Currently, the MATE overlay has 14 meta-base packages and 16 > > mate-extra packages; this might slightly change when reconsidering > > if their location is alright, however it is near the average (~15) > > per category so that should be fit. TL;DR: My avg was wrong, it is larger (110); but low (51) on *-base. The average there was based on what I historically saw mentioned in another new category thread, our categories seem to have grown since; I didn't actually check it, but running the following command to check out the actual average it seems that it is higher at ~110 packages. `for d in $(find /usr/portage/ -maxdepth 1 -type d | grep -) ; do ls -1 ${d} | wc -l ; done | awk '{sum+=$1}END{print sum/NR}'` If we however do this on the -base packages (grep -- -base), we get ~51 packages as being the average; gnome-base for example has 41 packages. > That seems a little on the small side? Can we just do a single > category for all of it, instead? People can go bikeshed on the name. TL;DR: Yes, we could try that; but what would be a consistent name? Given these more correct statistics, that indeed seems rather small; combining them, we indeed would get closer to a reasonable size for a category. But its naming becomes way more tricky then. The first thing that comes to mind is dropping the suffix; but then we end up with just 'mate' which is inconsistent with how we name the rest. Since introducing a suffix after 'mate' when grouping all packages doesn't really make much sense, it might make more sense to make '-mate' the suffix. But enumerating existing prefixes, I see none that makes sense; see for yourself: app-mate, dev-mate, games-mate, gnome-mate, gnustep-mate, gpe-mate, java-mate, kde-mate, lxde-mate, mail-mate, media-mate, net-mate, perl-mate, razorqt-mate, rox-mate, sci-mate, sec-mate, sys-mate, www-mate, x11-mate, xfce-mate So, this makes me question why to go for an inconsistent naming; and if we keep 'mate-base' then it feels wrong to move 'mate-extra' stuff in there, so, I really wonder if the amount of packages matters that much. Especially since I count at least 27 categories that are <= 20 pkgs: `for d in $(find /usr/portage/ -maxdepth 1 -type d | grep -) ; do if [[ $(ls -1 ${d} | wc -l) -le 20 ]] ; then echo ${d} ; fi ; done | wc -l` Doing this again we see 43 categories that are <= 30 pkgs, that's like a quarter of the Portage tree; it's representative to show that this is uncommon, but not necessarily an actual exception. It's indeed a recipe for bikeshedding; but I want to avoid this from falling under a situation where there's no actual decision no which way we proceed. As I see it going forward: - If we agree on a consistent name for a single category, we pick that. - If we don't agree on a name for a single category, we see whether we want to agree on just having two categories to be consistent. - If we neither agree on the naming or two categories, I see myself forced to insert MATE packages across other existing categories; but I don't think people would be happy with that either. Thank you in advance for further input on this. -- With kind regards, Tom Wijsman (TomWij) Gentoo Developer E-mail address : [email protected] GPG Public Key : 6D34E57D GPG Fingerprint : C165 AF18 AB4C 400B C3D2 ABF0 95B2 1FCD 6D34 E57D
