2016-01-08 15:47 GMT+00:00 zimbatm <[email protected]>: > The issue with naming is that everyone has their opinion. > > Since other smart people have already played the categorization game can I > suggest to restrict the discussion to which *existing* structure we should > adopt ? > There are a lot of big repositories out there: debian, gentoo portage, > archlinux, pkgsrc, ... One of them is bound to work, mostly. The nice > benefit would also be of not having to talk about categorization ever > again, unless the packaged project doesn't exist in the canonical > repository. > That's quite good observation.
> > I don't care what structure we chose as long as it's shallower than what > we have right now. Like OP I'm tired of searching for packages and then > entering long paths in my shell. > > > On Fri, 8 Jan 2016 at 15:03 Bjørn Forsman <[email protected]> wrote: > >> On 8 January 2016 at 15:58, Vladimír Čunát <[email protected]> wrote: >> > Personally, I would make it much flatter and also make it (almost) >> > exactly correspond to our *attribute* hierarchy. >> >> That's a good idea, I think! >> >> /Bjørn >> _______________________________________________ >> nix-dev mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev >> > > _______________________________________________ > nix-dev mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev > > -- Tomasz Czyż
_______________________________________________ nix-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev
