On 02/23/2014 05:02 AM, Tom Wijsman wrote:
> On Sat, 22 Feb 2014 17:33:57 +0000 (UTC)
> Duncan <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Tom Wijsman posted on Sat, 22 Feb 2014 18:08:24 +0100 as excerpted:
>>
>>>> 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?
>>
>> mate-desktop ?
>
> While still inconsistent with what already exists, that indeed sounds
> sane towards the user, +1; does someone object 'mate-desktop'?
>
>> (The mate-base and mate-extra split seems more consistent with the
>> rest of the tree to me, and around a dozen packages each seems fine,
>> but if it's to be a single category, mate-desktop seems reasonable.
>> Or desktop- mate, or mate-dt...)
>
> (Or do we want a consistent 'mate-base' / 'mate-extra' approach?)
>
I personally prefer the base/extra approach for consistency and
segregation reasons.
