On Sat, May 24, 2008 at 10:54:52AM -0500, Steve Greenland wrote: > > (NOTE: Am I the only one who thinks descriptions, especially short > > descriptions as in phenny, usually shouldn't tell what language was > > used to implement the program? It's just not relevant to the user.) > > I mostly agree with this. The exception would be development tools and > libraries, where the implementation language can be relevant. OTOH, > those kind of tools probably should be in the relevant section. > > (I sometimes look at implementation language for user apps *if* I > expect it's something I'm going to want to hack, but at that level I can > just look at the dependencies.)
True. And there is debtags which classify by implimentation language: $ aptitude search ~Gimplemented-in::perl > For your main point, that user apps belong in a section relevant to > their function, not their implementation, agree 100%. Yes. Osamu -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]