>>>>> On Mon, 10 Mar 2025, Maciej Barć wrote: > W dniu 10.03.2025 o 23:42, Eli Schwartz pisze: >> I don't understand your argument at all. "ml" is hardly a reserved >> concept, and dev-ml exists precisely for "libraries and utilities >> relevant to the ML programming language", which isn't going to get >> confused with sci-ml/ for the same reason nobody would dream of >> searching in sci-cpp/ for "scientific software written in C++", as the >> emphasis is on *science* and naturally brings the concept of machine >> learning to mind.
> If I would see the name "sci-cpp" for the 1st time I would indeed > think of C++ libs for scientific usage. Not sure what other "CPP" you > have meant here. :) > I would say "ml" is kinda indeed reserved. Without context I would read it as "milliliter". :) > But maybe we could move ocaml pkgs into "dev-ocaml" and then > introduce "dev-ml". In case of having "dev-ocaml" and "sci-ml" > nobody would get confused. > As I see "dev-ml" all the time I work on ::gentoo, having other "*-ml" > feels very confusing to me. I tend to agree. We have some duplicates, but most are generic ones like *-libs or *-misc, so they cannot cause confusion. The only more specific duplicates are sys-fs / net-fs and gui-wm / x11-wm where the second part denotes the same concept. Ulrich
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
