On 11690 March 1977, Raphael Geissert wrote:
>> php Everything about PHP
> Does "everything" really means everything?
> At least the following are missing:
> php5-adodb
> libphp-adodb
> libmarkdown-php
> I haven't looked at others.
It should. PHP was a late addition, so we mi
On So, 15 Mär 2009, Joerg Jaspert wrote:
> > Furthermore, you have moved
> > cm-*
> > to fonts. Maybe lmodern* should also be moved to fonts???
>
> Without the * i guess? Done.
Right, I thought we had some -x11 variant, wrongly thought.
> > There are several other package shipping packages i
On 11690 March 1977, Timo Jyrinki wrote:
> There are also at least aspell-el and openoffice.org-l10n-el, which
> are certainly not Lisp unless Greek has a lot of parentheses :)
It seems the priority of the -el match was a little above what it should
have been. :)
Well, there is a reason we do su
On 11690 March 1977, Norbert Preining wrote:
> Can please move
> texlive-doc-el
> from the section lisp to the section doc, it is definitely not a lisp
> file but only documentations in Greek.
Haha. Yeah well. Seems i missed that.
> Furthermore, you have moved
> cm-*
> to fonts. Mayb
Raphael Geissert wrote:
> And what's the final list of sections? lintian needs to be updated
See http://lists.debian.org/debian-policy/2009/03/msg00127.html
Cheers,
Emilio
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Hi Joerg,
2009/3/15 Joerg Jaspert :
[...]
> php Everything about PHP
Does "everything" really means everything?
At least the following are missing:
php5-adodb
libphp-adodb
libmarkdown-php
I haven't looked at others.
>
>
> Note that we used some kind of "section priority" to
2009/3/15 Norbert Preining :
>> http://ftp-master.debian.org/~joerg/sections.march2009.txt
>
> Can please move
> texlive-doc-el
> from the section lisp to the section doc, it is definitely not a lisp
> file but only documentations in Greek.
There are also at least aspell-el and openoffice.
Hi Jörg,
(answering to debian-devel and not d-d-a where the mail followup was
set)
On So, 15 Mär 2009, Joerg Jaspert wrote:
> http://ftp-master.debian.org/~joerg/sections.march2009.txt
Can please move
texlive-doc-el
from the section lisp to the section doc, it is definitely not a lisp
f
Gunnar Wolf writes:
> Ok. Lintian does not yet like httpd as a section, but I guess you will
> not reject an upload just because I listened to you ;-)
Lintian is waiting for the d-d-a post saying that the new section changes
have been implemented, FWIW.
--
Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org)
Hi,
Joerg Jaspert dijo [Thu, Feb 26, 2009 at 09:07:35PM +0100]:
> As Lenny is finally released, and we are early in the cycle for squeeze,
> now is the best time to do some long-needed changes to our archive.
> Much of what we are currently doing is not visible to you as a user of
> this archive,
Hello,
Joerg Jaspert, le Fri 27 Feb 2009 09:02:11 +0100, a écrit :
> > Maybe it could be interesting to open an accessibility section?
>
> Maybe, maybe not. What packages would you put into it?
Just a quick rough list (90 bin packages):
accerciser
at-spi
at-spi-doc
big-cursor
brltty
brltty-flit
On Sun, Mar 01, 2009 at 10:14:34AM +0100, Bernhard R. Link wrote:
> * Carsten Hey [090228 19:21]:
> > > It shouldn't be anything harder than adding 'deprecated'
> > > (non-library, deprecated software) to complement oldlibs,
> >
> > Adding non-library packages to oldlibs would cause these to be
>
* Carsten Hey [090228 19:21]:
> > It shouldn't be anything harder than adding 'deprecated'
> > (non-library, deprecated software) to complement oldlibs,
>
> Adding non-library packages to oldlibs would cause these to be handled
> like a library by deborphan and thus possibly being falsely displaye
Hi,
On Fri, Feb 27, 2009 at 10:59:27AM +, Enrico Zini wrote:
> I propose 'oldlibs' to be renamed to 'deprecated'.
>
> That would also fit, for example, packages abandoned upstream, or
> packages that have a better alternative, but that still have users.
I would expect to have so called trans
On Sat, Feb 28, 2009 at 01:03:39PM +0100, Enrico Zini wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 27, 2009 at 10:03:55PM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > There are tools that understand the special meaning of the 'oldlibs'
> > section and treat it specially; at least deborphan comes to mind,
> > there may be others. I d
On Fri, Feb 27, 2009 at 10:03:55PM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
> There are tools that understand the special meaning of the 'oldlibs' section
> and treat it specially; at least deborphan comes to mind, there may be
> others. I don't see the necessity for such a section rename, but if it
> happen
On Fri, Feb 27, 2009 at 09:31:25PM +0100, Joerg Jaspert wrote:
> >> Get me a short description for it.
> > "Compiler, libraries, and tools for OCaml: a static typed ML language
> > implementation supporting functional, imperative, and object-oriented
> > programming styles".
> You have an interesti
On Sat, Feb 28, 2009 at 4:22 PM, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> Le vendredi 27 février 2009 à 21:40 +0100, Joerg Jaspert a écrit :
>> Select one of cli-mono or ecma-cli and please also get me a short
>> description :)
>
> How about:
>
> cli-mono -- The Common Language Infrastructure, the Mono implement
Le vendredi 27 février 2009 à 21:40 +0100, Joerg Jaspert a écrit :
> Select one of cli-mono or ecma-cli and please also get me a short
> description :)
How about:
cli-mono -- The Common Language Infrastructure, the Mono implementation
and packages containing Common Intermediate Langua
On Fri, Feb 27, 2009 at 10:59:27AM +, Enrico Zini wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 26, 2009 at 09:07:35PM +0100, Joerg Jaspert wrote:
> > We plan on changing the current sections in the archive. With the rapid
> > growth of archive, many of them have become too big to be useful anymore.
> I propose 'oldl
On Fri, 2009-02-27 at 21:24 +0100, Joerg Jaspert wrote:
> >> video
> > mplayer*
>
> That is already in.
>
> > vswitch*
>
> No hit for this match?!
Holger probably meant dvswitch. Which is in NEW, anyway.
Ben.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
On Thu, Feb 26, 2009 at 09:07:35PM +0100, Joerg Jaspert wrote:
> Hello world,
>
> We also plan on adding a number of new sections.
wanna-build will need to be change for this too, and will
probably break if you give it an unknown section. Please
wait until the list is added to wanna-build.
Kur
I demand that Felipe Augusto van de Wiel (faw) may or may not have written...
[snip]
> I do believe that users are getting used to see the terms i18n/l10n, and if
> our users are able to find out what httpd and vcs mean, I'm pretty sure
> they will survive l10n. :-)
"Where's the t1g3r section?"
Michael Tautschnig writes:
> Seeing that the change of sections could pose some technical problems
> (not only challenges implementing them) as well, let me ask one
> (possibly stupid) question: Why do we need sections at all?
>
> All that policy states is that it simplifies some handling of pack
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 27-02-2009 08:41, Roger Leigh wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 27, 2009 at 02:53:04AM -0300, Felipe Augusto van de Wiel (faw)
> wrote:
>> On 26-02-2009 23:10, Darren Salt wrote:
>>> I demand that Frans Pop may or may not have written...
Joerg Jaspert wrot
El Vie 27 Feb 2009, Joerg Jaspert escribió:
> Thats ok, get me a good name and short description for it please.
> "r" is not a good name, i think.
gnu-r ?
Everything about GNU R, an statistical computation and graphics system
luciano
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian
>> Like the other poster, cli is very confusing. If we have enough
>> packages (get me a list/matches :) ), im not against a section for it,
>> but cli wouldnt be my favorite name for it.
> I’m not sure for the section name, but here is a list of matches:
Select one of cli-mono or ecma-cli and pl
On 11674 March 1977, Aaron M. Ucko wrote:
> As I mentioned directly to override-change before encountering this
> message, I'd argue that my goo package is a (somewhat exotic)
> candidate. In general, here's a first cut at a full list, including
> it and your initial proposals:
Thanks.
--
bye,
>> Get me a short description for it.
> "Compiler, libraries, and tools for OCaml: a static typed ML language
> implementation supporting functional, imperative, and object-oriented
> programming styles".
You have an interesting definition of short, i stopped after : for
now. :)
(Its a different
> You also want totem* and kaffeine*.
Done.
> *-dbg packages could go in their own section(s) (debug, or libdebug &
> appdebug?); otherwise, I think that they should remain with (the bulk of) the
> packages for which they provide debug data.
All debug packages will go in the debug section.
--
>> video
> mplayer*
That is already in.
> vswitch*
No hit for this match?!
--
bye, Joerg
I've annoyed Ganneff enough with that package already, no
reason to top it off by a build-depend on emacs for writing control
files
pgpLuKXMhKlrs.pgp
Description: PGP signature
> Have sense to inaugurate a section with all the R modules? Nowadays
> many of them are in "math".
> $ apt-cache search r- | grep "^r-" | wc - l
> 133
Thats ok, get me a good name and short description for it please.
"r" is not a good name, i think.
--
bye, Joerg
* wiggy just looking at g
On 11674 March 1977, Edward Betts wrote:
> webfeed - RSS/Atom feed readers, aggregator and utilities
Not enough packages, can stay in web, especially as that gets rid of httpds.
--
bye, Joerg
cron.daily time, unlocking: slave_NEW
ftpbot: oh bugger off, slave_NEW isn't affected by dinstall :-)
[BTW, the only proper spelling is "GNUstep" -- not "Gnustep" or
"GNUStep".]
Vincent Danjean wrote:
> I maintain a page.app package.
You mean paje.app, I assume (innocent typo)?
> It is right it is a gnustep application (ie it uses the gnustep
> framwork). However, I never use the gnustep envir
>> We plan on changing the current sections in the archive. With the rapid
>> growth of archive, many of them have become too big to be useful anymore.
> According to my knowledge of dak, the sections are global. Which means
> that we don't have to worry about a possible kernel update for
> lenny+
Josselin Mouette writes:
> Le vendredi 27 février 2009 à 14:33 +0100, Raphael Hertzog a écrit :
>> On Fri, 27 Feb 2009, Joerg Jaspert wrote:
>> > Like the other poster, cli is very confusing. If we have enough
>> > packages (get me a list/matches :) ), im not against a section for it,
>> > but cli
Le vendredi 27 février 2009 à 14:33 +0100, Raphael Hertzog a écrit :
> On Fri, 27 Feb 2009, Joerg Jaspert wrote:
> > Like the other poster, cli is very confusing. If we have enough
> > packages (get me a list/matches :) ), im not against a section for it,
> > but cli wouldnt be my favorite name for
On Fri, 27 Feb 2009, Joerg Jaspert wrote:
> Like the other poster, cli is very confusing. If we have enough
> packages (get me a list/matches :) ), im not against a section for it,
> but cli wouldnt be my favorite name for it.
I would suggest "c-sharp" for the section.
Cheers,
--
Raphaël Hertzog
Hi Stefano!
Cc:ing again the Debian Common Lisp mailing list, please keep it!
On Fri, 27 Feb 2009 13:02:59 +0100, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 27, 2009 at 11:04:36AM +0100, Luca Capello wrote:
>> FYI, as Aaron already showed with his list, ome packages (especially the
>> "non-library"
> Bastian Blank wrote:
> > On Thu, Feb 26, 2009 at 09:07:35PM +0100, Joerg Jaspert wrote:
> > According to my knowledge of dak, the sections are global. Which means
> > that we don't have to worry about a possible kernel update for
> > lenny+1/2. Am I correct with that?
>
> The sections are define
On Fri, Feb 27, 2009 at 11:04:36AM +0100, Luca Capello wrote:
> FYI, as Aaron already showed with his list, ome packages (especially the
> "non-library" ones) do not have the cl-* suffix. StumpWM is missing,
> for example.
Note that the current language-oriented sections (python, perl, and
the ju
Bastian Blank wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 26, 2009 at 09:07:35PM +0100, Joerg Jaspert wrote:
> According to my knowledge of dak, the sections are global. Which means
> that we don't have to worry about a possible kernel update for
> lenny+1/2. Am I correct with that?
The sections are defined in the overr
On Fri, Feb 27, 2009 at 02:53:04AM -0300, Felipe Augusto van de Wiel (faw)
wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 26-02-2009 23:10, Darren Salt wrote:
> > I demand that Frans Pop may or may not have written...
> >> Joerg Jaspert wrote:
> [...]
> >>> The new sections are:
Le vendredi 27 février 2009 à 09:03 +0100, Joerg Jaspert a écrit :
> Like the other poster, cli is very confusing. If we have enough
> packages (get me a list/matches :) ), im not against a section for it,
> but cli wouldnt be my favorite name for it.
I’m not sure for the section name, but here is
Hi there!
Cc:ing the Debian Common Lisp mailing list.
On Fri, 27 Feb 2009 02:02:03 +0100, Aaron M. Ucko wrote:
> Joerg Jaspert writes:
>> Its lisp. Not one special part of it, just lisp. So other dialects as
>> well, if someone gets me a list of packages (or matches) for it.
[...]
> cl-*
FY
Le vendredi 27 février 2009 à 01:19 +, Sam Morris a écrit :
> > I don’t like the name either, but can you think of a better one? We
> > could use “mono”, but it’s the implementation name.
>
> 'clr' (common language runtime)? It's the acronym that MS uses quite a
> bit.
CLR is the acronym for
On Fri, Feb 27, 2009 at 07:13:07AM +, Matthew Johnson wrote:
> localization is the spelling given by the OED, so it is correct in all
> locales. It doesn't even list localisation as an alternative spelling.
The OED lists plenty of examples of "localisation" and "localise";
whether you consider
On Thu, Feb 26, 2009 at 09:07:35PM +0100, Joerg Jaspert wrote:
> We plan on changing the current sections in the archive. With the rapid
> growth of archive, many of them have become too big to be useful anymore.
I propose 'oldlibs' to be renamed to 'deprecated'.
That would also fit, for example
Hi,
On Freitag, 27. Februar 2009, Bastian Blank wrote:
> According to my knowledge of dak, the sections are global. Which means
> that we don't have to worry about a possible kernel update for
> lenny+1/2. Am I correct with that?
Can you/anybody please explain how this is related to the sections?
On Fri, Feb 27, 2009 at 07:19:11AM +, Matthew Johnson wrote:
> Should Java libs be in lib or libdevel (they are both). This is one of
> the reasons we've wanted a Java section.
I wouldn't mind a proper discussion on the pros and cons of both.
That'd help me for debtags as well, where java li
On Thu, Feb 26, 2009 at 09:07:35PM +0100, Joerg Jaspert wrote:
> We plan on changing the current sections in the archive. With the rapid
> growth of archive, many of them have become too big to be useful anymore.
According to my knowledge of dak, the sections are global. Which means
that we don't
Vincent Danjean wrote:
> What about creating a 'libs' section for different languages?
> Something like libs-ruby, libs-perl, libs-python, libs-java, libs-r, ...
>
> This would allow to split the big 'libs' section and this avoid to put
> libs (ie mostly automatic pulled packages) in sections wher
Joerg Jaspert wrote:
> The new sections are:
>
> ruby Everything about ruby, an interpreted object oriented
> language.
> java Everything about Java
> videoVideo viewers, editors, recording, streaming
> fonts
Joerg Jaspert wrote:
> gnustep
> gnustep*
> libgnustep*
> *.app
> *.framework
I maintain a page.app package. It is right it is a gnustep application
(ie it uses the gnustep framwork). However, I never use the gnustep
environment. Up
>> ruby Everything about ruby, an interpreted object
>> oriented
>> language.
>> java Everything about Java
> How about a "cli" section about everything related to Mono and the
> Common Language Infrastructure (aka .NET) ? That make
> Maybe it could be interesting to open an accessibility section?
Maybe, maybe not. What packages would you put into it?
--
bye, Joerg
LOL die Telefonnummer vom Arbeitsamt Mönchengladbach ist echt 404-0?
Soll das nen schlechter Scherz sein?
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@
On Fri Feb 27 02:00, Enrico Zini wrote:
> Putting java libraries into 'java' instead of 'libs' would just make
> it harder for a package manager to hide libraries. Debtags will work
> for that, so no big deal, but at the moment 'libs' is nice because it
> allows me to auto-tag packages from th
On Fri Feb 27 02:10, Darren Salt wrote:
> > I'd prefer "localization".
>
> Whereas I'd prefer "localisation"...
>
> > - We use en_US in general -> "ize"
>
> ... unless you're localising for en_US. OTOH, given that that section is for
> localisation, "localization" is probably right, being locali
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 26-02-2009 23:10, Darren Salt wrote:
> I demand that Frans Pop may or may not have written...
>> Joerg Jaspert wrote:
[...]
>>> The new sections are:
>>> localisationsLanguage packs
>> I'd prefer "localization".
> Whereas I'd prefer "l
Daniel Moerner writes:
> chicken-bin
Ah, yes, I meant to list that but forgot; good catch.
> mzscheme and drscheme are just plt-scheme transitional packages by now
True; in that case, perhaps they should go to oldlibs until they
retire altogether.
--
Aaron M. Ucko, KB1CJC (amu at alum.mit.ed
I demand that Joerg Jaspert may or may not have written...
[snip]
> The initial set of packages moved into the new sections will be found
> using the following matches:
[snip]
> video
[snip]
> *xine*
Slightly over-broad, unless you want to move library packages too (but I see
that
I demand that Frans Pop may or may not have written...
> Joerg Jaspert wrote:
>> We plan on changing the current sections in the archive. With the rapid
>> growth of archive, many of them have become too big to be useful anymore.
> Great.
>> The new sections are:
> [...]
>> localisations
On Thu, Feb 26, 2009 at 09:07:35PM +0100, Joerg Jaspert wrote:
> While we acknowledge that something like debtags will make a better
> long-term solution, we do not think that it is ready yet to completly
> replace sections (e.g. because it isn't assured that all packages have
> tags). This is why
On Thu, Feb 26, 2009 at 5:02 PM, Aaron M. Ucko wrote:
> Joerg Jaspert writes:
>
>> Its lisp. Not one special part of it, just lisp. So other dialects as
>> well, if someone gets me a list of packages (or matches) for it.
>
> As I mentioned directly to override-change before encountering this
> me
On Fri, 27 Feb 2009 02:13:48 +0100, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> Le jeudi 26 février 2009 à 17:08 -0800, Kelly Clowers a écrit :
>> On Thu, Feb 26, 2009 at 15:50, Josselin Mouette
>> wrote:
>> > Le jeudi 26 février 2009 à 21:07 +0100, Joerg Jaspert a écrit :
>> >> ruby Everything
Le jeudi 26 février 2009 à 17:08 -0800, Kelly Clowers a écrit :
> On Thu, Feb 26, 2009 at 15:50, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> > Le jeudi 26 février 2009 à 21:07 +0100, Joerg Jaspert a écrit :
> >> ruby Everything about ruby, an interpreted object
> >> oriented
> >>
Joerg Jaspert writes:
> Its lisp. Not one special part of it, just lisp. So other dialects as
> well, if someone gets me a list of packages (or matches) for it.
One more: ikarus (which I initially overlooked because it's only
available on i386 :-/).
--
Aaron M. Ucko, KB1CJC (amu at alum.mit.ed
On Thu, Feb 26, 2009 at 15:50, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> Le jeudi 26 février 2009 à 21:07 +0100, Joerg Jaspert a écrit :
>> ruby Everything about ruby, an interpreted object
>> oriented
>> language.
>> java Everything about Java
>
>
Joerg Jaspert writes:
> Its lisp. Not one special part of it, just lisp. So other dialects as
> well, if someone gets me a list of packages (or matches) for it.
As I mentioned directly to override-change before encountering this
message, I'd argue that my goo package is a (somewhat exotic)
candi
How about:
webfeed - RSS/Atom feed readers, aggregator and utilities
akregator
blam
canto
cl-rss
claws-mail-feeds-reader
dcoprss
evolution-rss
feed2imap
firefox-sagefirefox-sage
kitty
liferea*
magpierss
miro*
newsbeuter
nrss
olive
php-xml-rss
planet
python-feedparser
python-feedvalidator
python-p
El Jue 26 Feb 2009, Joerg Jaspert escribió:
> ruby Everything about ruby, an interpreted object oriented
> language.
> java Everything about Java
Have sense to inaugurate a section with all the R modules? Nowadays many of
them are i
Hi Jög,
On Donnerstag, 26. Februar 2009, Joerg Jaspert wrote:
> As Lenny is finally released, and we are early in the cycle for squeeze,
> now is the best time to do some long-needed changes to our archive.
[...]
Cool, nice!
> The new sections are:
I think an r section would be useful, there ar
Le jeudi 26 février 2009 à 21:07 +0100, Joerg Jaspert a écrit :
> ruby Everything about ruby, an interpreted object oriented
> language.
> java Everything about Java
How about a "cli" section about everything related to Mono and the
On Thu, Feb 26, 2009 at 11:48:18PM +0100, Joerg Jaspert wrote:
> > I don't if that warrants an "ocaml" section, which is your call, but
> > if it does, well, ... heads up :-)
>
> Get me a short description for it.
"Compiler, libraries, and tools for OCaml: a static typed ML language
implementatio
>> lisp Everything about Lisp
> Is this just about Common Lisp, or other Lisp dialects as well? I'm
> mainly referring to Scheme here, as it is another Lisp dialect in
> (relatively) widespread use (the third one being Emacs-Lisp).
Its lisp. Not one special part of it, just li
>> database Databases
> [...]
>> database
>> postgresql*
>> pg*
>> sqlite*
>> mysql*
>> libmysql*
>> db4.*
>> libdb4*
>> firebird*
>> sql-
On 11673 March 1977, Frans Pop wrote:
>> localisationsLanguage packs
> I'd prefer "localization".
> - We use en_US in general -> "ize"
Well, I dont really care. Fine, adjusted.
> - Having the section name plural seems inconsistent with other
> sections.
Dito.
>> video
> [...]
>>
On 11673 March 1977, Adeodato Simó wrote:
> * Joerg Jaspert [Thu, 26 Feb 2009 21:07:35 +0100]:
>
>> database
>> libmysql*
>> libdb4*
> I'm not sure these (and possibly *some* of the other lib* packages
> included in the listing) should be moved out of Section: libs.
Joerg Jaspert, le Thu 26 Feb 2009 21:07:35 +0100, a écrit :
> We plan on changing the current sections in the archive. With the rapid
> growth of archive, many of them have become too big to be useful anymore.
>
>[...]
>
> The new sections are:
>
> ruby Everything about ruby,
> Not like it is *that* important, but we now have more than 100
> OCaml-related source packages in the archive, most of which are
> libraries for OCaml development.
> I don't if that warrants an "ocaml" section, which is your call, but
> if it does, well, ... heads up :-)
Get me a short descrip
On Thu, 2009-02-26 at 21:07 +0100, Joerg Jaspert wrote:
> The new sections are:
[..]
> videoVideo viewers, editors, recording, streaming
What about renaming sound as audio? (if we introduce the video one, )
Since the (perl|python|ruby|...) sections should contains libraries,
m
On Thu, Feb 26, 2009 at 12:07 PM, Joerg Jaspert wrote:
> lisp (no, not in brackets)
> cl-*
> *-lisp
> *-el
Two things:
First, if by Lisp you mean everything related to Lisp, then this
should probably also include scheme*, not just Common Li
Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 26, 2009 at 09:07:35PM +0100, Joerg Jaspert wrote:
>> The new sections are:
>
> Not like it is *that* important, but we now have more than 100
> OCaml-related source packages in the archive, most of which are
> libraries for OCaml development.
>
> I don't i
Hi,
Joerg Jaspert wrote:
> java Everything about Java
{...}
> gcj*
*gcj, too probably.
> database
> postgresql*
> pg*
> sqlite*
> mysql*
> libmysql*
That also hits database libs.
Joerg Jaspert writes:
> The new sections are:
[...]
> lisp Everything about Lisp
[...]
>
Is this just about Common Lisp, or other Lisp dialects as well? I'm
mainly referring to Scheme here, as it is another Lisp dialect in
(relatively) widespread use (the third one being Emacs
Hi
Dne Thu, 26 Feb 2009 21:07:35 +0100
Joerg Jaspert napsal(a):
> database Databases
[...]
> database
> postgresql*
> pg*
> sqlite*
> mysql*
> libmysql*
> db4.*
> libdb
On Thu, Feb 26, 2009 at 09:07:35PM +0100, Joerg Jaspert wrote:
> The new sections are:
Not like it is *that* important, but we now have more than 100
OCaml-related source packages in the archive, most of which are
libraries for OCaml development.
I don't if that warrants an "ocaml" section, which
Joerg Jaspert wrote:
> We plan on changing the current sections in the archive. With the rapid
> growth of archive, many of them have become too big to be useful
> anymore.
Great.
> The new sections are:
[...]
> localisationsLanguage packs
I'd prefer "localization".
- We use en_US
* Joerg Jaspert [Thu, 26 Feb 2009 21:07:35 +0100]:
> database
> libmysql*
> libdb4*
I'm not sure these (and possibly *some* of the other lib* packages
included in the listing) should be moved out of Section: libs. I can see
how having a database section to browse c
Hello world,
As Lenny is finally released, and we are early in the cycle for squeeze,
now is the best time to do some long-needed changes to our archive.
Much of what we are currently doing is not visible to you as a user of
this archive, but the action we talk about now is:
We plan on changing t
90 matches
Mail list logo
