Eric Lecoutre <lecoutre <at> stat.ucl.ac.be> writes: : : At 15:06 24/11/2004, Gabor Grothendieck wrote: : >Eric Lecoutre <lecoutre <at> stat.ucl.ac.be> writes: : > : >: 6. Final point has already been discussed in the past. It is about misc : >: packages and pieces of code. I propose the creation of 5 packages: : >: - miscGraphics (keywords: misc, Graphics) : >: - miscStatistics (keywords: misc, Statistics) : >: - miscMathematics (keywords: misc, Mathematics) : >: - miscBasics (keywords: misc, Basics) : >: - miscProgramming (keywords: misc, Programming) : > : >Rather than preset the categories perhaps evolving them would : >be better, just starting out with a single Misc package and then : >decomposing it into multiple packages as the categories become : >clear. : : Those categories are taken from KEYWORDS (master entries). I guess it : wouldn't be difficult to still have substancial entries for those packages, : if some misc package maintainer would make the job to break their package : into pieces. BTW, I have to admit this choice is not easy to make for : several reasons, the main one beeing to keep the ability to modify one's : own contributions. : For those packages, a collaborative plattform such as SourceForge and so : on, with Sync-ability, could be a good choice. : : Eric
Sorry, I did not understand the keyword connection you were making. My comment was based on the 80/20 idea that if 80% of the software gets contributed to 20%, i.e. one of the packages, then perhaps having 5 is superfluous. If the categories are made afterwards, rather than before, one can construct them to esnure a more even number of routines. ______________________________________________ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
