On Sunday 05 June 2005 23:55, Ned Ludd wrote:
On Sun, 2005-06-05 at 16:57 -0400, Nathan L. Adams wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Well obviously there needs to be a consensus on *how* to logically
organize things before anyone goes willy nilly changing stuff. Do
I'm with Ned fozer on this, in general at least. This is the second time this
issue has come up over the last month or so; it's what kicks off the flat-tree
debate. My preference in practice is to leave the current tree allocation of
packages to categories well alone (to avoid unnecessary
Currently pam stuff (implementations, modules) are organized in the worst way
I ever seen.
Most of them are in sys-libs, some of them in app-admin, other in app-crypt,
pam_smb in net-misc and so on.
I think we should reorganize them and have a sys-pam category with
implementations (Linux-PAM
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò wrote:
Currently pam stuff (implementations, modules) are organized in the worst way
I ever seen.
Most of them are in sys-libs, some of them in app-admin, other in app-crypt,
pam_smb in net-misc and so on.
I think we
On Sun, 2005-06-05 at 16:22 +0200, Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò wrote:
Currently pam stuff (implementations, modules) are organized in the worst way
I ever seen.
Most of them are in sys-libs, some of them in app-admin, other in app-crypt,
pam_smb in net-misc and so on.
I think we should
Ned Ludd wrote:
On Sun, 2005-06-05 at 16:22 +0200, Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò wrote:
Currently pam stuff (implementations, modules) are organized in the worst way
I ever seen.
Most of them are in sys-libs, some of them in app-admin, other in app-crypt,
pam_smb in net-misc and so on.
I think
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
foser wrote:
On Sun, 2005-06-05 at 18:34 +0200, Jonas Geiregat wrote:
I do agree with you but some package just have completely wrong place
within portage, such package placements migh confuse the user.
To give an example: mzscheme was placed in
On Sun, 2005-06-05 at 13:50 -0400, Michael Cummings wrote:
Solar,
I realize you meant this as a general statement of opinion and not a
flame-baiter, but can you elaborate on:
On Sunday 05 June 2005 11:37, Ned Ludd wrote:
Invalidates binary package trees.
My (wrong?)
On Sun, 2005-06-05 at 19:34 +0200, Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò wrote:
On Sunday 05 June 2005 17:37, Ned Ludd wrote:
I think they are fine where they are. Moving stuff around is a waste of
time. Makes things more complex. Makes more work on everybody.
Sorry but I don't agree with that, at least
On Sun, 2005-06-05 at 13:25 -0400, Nathan L. Adams wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
foser wrote:
On Sun, 2005-06-05 at 18:34 +0200, Jonas Geiregat wrote:
I do agree with you but some package just have completely wrong place
within portage, such package placements
Nathan L. Adams wrote:
Then why is their a browsable Categories link on the packages site?
http://packages.gentoo.org/categories/
Very good question , ..
I don't agree with Ned. Organizing the packages logically makes things
less confusing for the end-user and developers alike and
On Sun, 2005-06-05 at 21:21 +0200, Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò wrote:
On Sunday 05 June 2005 21:03, Ned Ludd wrote:
14 files matching the pam prefix and 18 thing matching description.
You missed pam_ssh. And that's just an example.
By the way... mind telling everyone here how did you do that
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Ned Ludd wrote:
*poof* we now reshuffle, but then we can do auth with ldap. So lets
move
all the */ldap* related subjects under it sys-auth/... Then a month or
six later comes along sys-ldap and it gets moved there. The logic will
go full
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Nathan L. Adams wrote:
Well obviously there needs to be a consensus on *how* to logically
organize things before anyone goes willy nilly changing stuff. Do you
group by what the package is used for (email vs. game vs. web browser)
or by what it is
On Sun, Jun 05, 2005 at 04:22:10PM +0200, Diego 'Flameeyes' Petten? wrote:
Currently pam stuff (implementations, modules) are organized in the worst way
I ever seen.
Most of them are in sys-libs, some of them in app-admin, other in app-crypt,
pam_smb in net-misc and so on.
I think we
On Sun, 2005-06-05 at 17:44 +0300, Alin Nastac wrote:
[snip]
it is a laborious work, but it could be done.
too bad we don't use subversion :(
I wonder if there is a svn interface to cvs, or if one could be written.
--
===
Mike Doty
Mike Doty wrote:
I wonder if there is a svn interface to cvs, or if one could be written.
rename/move is a feature of the svn database, not of the svn interface.
also support symlinks, btw.
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
17 matches
Mail list logo
