Re: [gentoo-dev] shouldn't eselect be in app-eselect ?
On Sat, Apr 04, 2015 at 08:49:51PM +0200, Michał Górny wrote: > Dnia 2015-04-04, o godz. 13:47:47 > Alex Brandt napisał(a): > > > On Saturday, April 04, 2015 14:41:37 Philip Webb wrote: > > > I read the recent thread re the new app-eselect. > > > Doing my weekly system update, > > > it strikes me that 'eselect' itself sb there too. > > > > > > Time to paint the bikesheds again ... (smile) > > > > I don't disagree but will simply point out that if this becomes true, we > > should also move dev-lang/python to dev-python, dev-lang/ruby to dev-ruby, > > and > > dev-lang/perl to dev-perl (not an exhaustive list). > > Portage to app-portage/, web browsers with plugins to www-plugins/... also, dev-java/oracle-jdk-bin, dev-java/icedtea ... > > -- > Best regards, > Michał Górny
Re: [gentoo-dev] shouldn't eselect be in app-eselect ?
> On Sat, 4 Apr 2015, Philip Webb wrote: > 150404 Alex Brandt wrote: >> On Saturday, April 04, 2015 14:41:37 Philip Webb wrote: >>> I read the recent thread re the new app-eselect. >>> Doing my weekly system update, >>> it strikes me that 'eselect' itself sb there too. >>> Time to paint the bikesheds again ... (smile) >> I don't disagree but will simply point out that if this becomes >> true, we should also move dev-lang/python to dev-python, >> dev-lang/ruby to dev-ruby & dev-lang/perl to dev-perl (not >> exhaustive). > No (and to the other objectors' lists): > there are many computer languages, but there is only 1 'eselect'. > The eselect set-up is unique within Gentoo, > which makes it natural to put it all under 1 category. eselect is an administration tool, therefore it goes into the app-admin category, together with other administration tools. That the main application goes into a generic category is a pattern that we have used for many years. Other examples, apart from programming languages, include app-editors/emacs vs app-emacs/*, app-editors/vim vs app-vim/*, and app-text/texlive vs dev-texlive/*. That said, this discussion is rather pointless now. The package move was done in the way it was announced [1], and I'm not going to touch all packages another time to update their dependency on eselect. Ulrich [1] https://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-dev/message/fff06b1f1b36e96d5e3ba134b2101de5 pgpIz07WgllMb.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] shouldn't eselect be in app-eselect ?
150404 Alex Brandt wrote: > On Saturday, April 04, 2015 14:41:37 Philip Webb wrote: >> I read the recent thread re the new app-eselect. >> Doing my weekly system update, >> it strikes me that 'eselect' itself sb there too. >> Time to paint the bikesheds again ... (smile) > I don't disagree but will simply point out that if this becomes true, > we should also move dev-lang/python to dev-python, > dev-lang/ruby to dev-ruby & dev-lang/perl to dev-perl (not exhaustive). No (and to the other objectors' lists): there are many computer languages, but there is only 1 'eselect'. The eselect set-up is unique within Gentoo, which makes it natural to put it all under 1 category. -- ,, SUPPORT ___//___, Philip Webb ELECTRIC /] [] [] [] [] []| Cities Centre, University of Toronto TRANSIT`-O--O---' purslowatchassdotutorontodotca
Re: [gentoo-dev] shouldn't eselect be in app-eselect ?
On Sat, Apr 4, 2015 at 1:49 PM, Michał Górny wrote: > Dnia 2015-04-04, o godz. 13:47:47 > Alex Brandt napisał(a): > > I don't disagree but will simply point out that if this becomes true, we > > should also move dev-lang/python to dev-python, dev-lang/ruby to > dev-ruby, and > > dev-lang/perl to dev-perl (not an exhaustive list). > > Portage to app-portage/, web browsers with plugins to www-plugins/... > That doesn't fit. Ruby is Ruby, Python is Python, vim is vim, and emacs is emacs, but a web browser is not a plugin.
Re: [gentoo-dev] shouldn't eselect be in app-eselect ?
Dnia 2015-04-04, o godz. 13:47:47 Alex Brandt napisał(a): > On Saturday, April 04, 2015 14:41:37 Philip Webb wrote: > > I read the recent thread re the new app-eselect. > > Doing my weekly system update, > > it strikes me that 'eselect' itself sb there too. > > > > Time to paint the bikesheds again ... (smile) > > I don't disagree but will simply point out that if this becomes true, we > should also move dev-lang/python to dev-python, dev-lang/ruby to dev-ruby, > and > dev-lang/perl to dev-perl (not an exhaustive list). Portage to app-portage/, web browsers with plugins to www-plugins/... -- Best regards, Michał Górny pgpyWHVP6nLWH.pgp Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] shouldn't eselect be in app-eselect ?
On 04/04/2015 02:41 PM, Philip Webb wrote: > I read the recent thread re the new app-eselect. > Doing my weekly system update, > it strikes me that 'eselect' itself sb there too. > > Time to paint the bikesheds again ... (smile) > This is consistent with a lot of other stuff. For example, emacs is under app-editors, while all of its "accessories" go under app-emacs. Likewise for www-servers/apache and www-apache/foo. You can argue either way, but one way creates a lot more work...
Re: [gentoo-dev] shouldn't eselect be in app-eselect ?
On Saturday, April 04, 2015 14:41:37 Philip Webb wrote: > I read the recent thread re the new app-eselect. > Doing my weekly system update, > it strikes me that 'eselect' itself sb there too. > > Time to paint the bikesheds again ... (smile) I don't disagree but will simply point out that if this becomes true, we should also move dev-lang/python to dev-python, dev-lang/ruby to dev-ruby, and dev-lang/perl to dev-perl (not an exhaustive list). Regards, -- Alex Brandt Cloud Evangelist for Rackspace and Developer for Gentoo http://blog.alunduil.com
[gentoo-dev] shouldn't eselect be in app-eselect ?
I read the recent thread re the new app-eselect. Doing my weekly system update, it strikes me that 'eselect' itself sb there too. Time to paint the bikesheds again ... (smile) -- ,, SUPPORT ___//___, Philip Webb ELECTRIC /] [] [] [] [] []| Cities Centre, University of Toronto TRANSIT`-O--O---' purslowatchassdotutorontodotca
