Change is inevitable. Resistance will only bring pain...I would agree, though, that reclassification should be kept to a minimum and I don't think load balancing the categories serves a useful purpose. Creating a few new categories that make sense to people browsing the collection and will remain useful for the long term would seem like the rational approach. For that reason, I would favor a general science category over more specific ones that may need to be augmented later. E.g, if we have a physics category, then some might later argue for chemistry, engineering, psychology, etc. If we just have science, most scientists would be content to put their packages there. I doubt it would ever become so huge that we'd feel a burning need to break it up. The FreeBSD science category has only 186 ports at the moment.
Regards,
Jason
On 02/06/16 14:39, Kamil Rytarowski wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 I have experienced a reclassification of packages in one Linux distribution. The original categories were inherited from old Red Hat from 90s. People wanted to revamp them to current reality and load balance the number of packages in each category. In the end they entered into perpetual alterations and movements, they worked for several days and the result was much worse than the original hierarchy. People were dissatisfied. I'm against any modification of categories. Please set them in stone. Even if they might be misleading in some cases, people are used to them, we have got scripts for the current sets of categories, websites etc. Please don't break it for no benefit. On 06.02.2016 20:33, Alistair Crooks wrote:In general, yes. In this case, no :( But I don't think it matters much to the general pkgsrc user. I dislike the situation we have now, where there are multiple choices of category for a package. That's a personal thing, and having to look locally as to whether a package is in time/ sysutils/ devel/ or net/ is one thing that annoys me. I find I look for everything on pkgsrc.se nowadays, but even that has failed me where I've used the wrong package name (pkg vs. pkgng). So I think having one place to look is, or that springs to mind initially, is best. And I think "science" overlaps so many of biology, math/, chemistry/, physics/. And where do you stop? molecular-biology, astro-physics/, nuclear-medicine? In the whole scheme of things, if we had a VCS tool that could track moves, that would be great. But we don't, and all follow up on that should go to tech-repository@. In the meantime, let's assume that moving pkgsrc entries between categories (physical movement, rather than listing tags under CATEGORIES) ist verboten, so we'll have to try to get it right a priori. I think, medium to longer term, it won't matter much to the vast majority of users, as long as the right search tools are there, and as we move to different tools (there's a lot more involved than mere repo conversion, though). And for those search tools, a huge and resounding THANK YOU! to the guys who do pkgsrc.se Best, Alistair On 6 February 2016 at 11:07, Greg Troxel <gdt%ir.bbn.com@localhost> wrote:Jason Bacon <bacon4000%gmail.com@localhost> writes:2) I'd like to see a general science category. As it is now, some science packages get shoehorned into math or biology. (e.g. chemtool, py-scipy) Where there aren't enough packages to warrant certain more specific categories, science would be a more intuitive place to look for them.That sounds ok to me. I would rather add it sooner than later, because I think renaming packages has significant cost. Other opinions?-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJWtloVAAoJEEuzCOmwLnZsHRYP/iN7R5LtoXzKLifKey3z22Kf iQJvUS534YBIyRQzFgzALfw1/qFPlPNLy8OHs+kr/G+A37uRD4uw+8qzDmLHEhHs Fm+aVJTY9w/U8cPpG+4W6bxi7f+lnUWt1Nh9D3bIKT0QxApfACWtqifcXAgTBpGB Wh+f4i5ijkTx4/Mq3ET8N+HFBP9E9swItD/rgpy723wWAK83fErLU3KRGjFvwJV3 F5lRhSwL5vSuPO9zrMJTBBc9YNnFIEVftzMDL0CI39zLqa2RMtcm4dk4Tedx4a2S Nps3sWpc5wg0NMctCCIt5ePal/eMYm/9nMPXp/M7hWfFb9EQs0UYeiVga0jSlmyt rEqn1ewX66My87QsVIbSFnrnIbmbltq6wS0XGQQlM1jGe6t8xaI4AZN+DX35QdJh 6YRLPfT186fhZkvC55eQxK8pIlByYV7mYfEwXtDP4da86rgwR3nZKY+uKXnPBogG JkRl13a+MNP9Rm65XpnElXlUGFUurjAu4IuDRF3NEd8NtGoe8aXYcJnEsPnfK8ns dMu7vVqk9krMaFqcW0CzhjV1pDF0kQOXhghzHx0d79Um4vSNdb4DdX819aa5rjN3 jzvgx7EcjWs/qhVgQ+Wx7OXO9eNKxKutrwi8QV6VeAARMY39dKCM0y21SWFdLdde Byb/abSklgp+LV5jBbHl =wBMn -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-- Never drink coke in a moving elevator. The elevator's motion coupled with the chemicals in coke produce hallucinations. People tend to change into lizards and attack without warning, and large bats usually fly in the window. Additionally, you begin to believe that elevators have windows.