On Sat, Jan 19, 2013 at 7:43 AM, Diego Elio Pettenò <flamee...@flameeyes.eu> wrote: > Some of us, including me, are also wondering why a separate category > is needed — while you might be over the median, it doesn't mean it's > that much more compelling — indeed my feeling is that it would be an > useless small category, especially if you only want to keep the core > and it won't ever grow. But I won't stop you if it's going to be > qt-core/qt-core as package name.
I tend to agree on leaving qt in the package names themselves for the reasons that have been raised. I'm not sure that the category "qt-core" makes sense though. Maybe x11-qt, or dev-qt, or just qt, or qt-qt if we must have a hyphen for its own sake and we're just making senseless stuff up. qt-core just doesn't make sense if it applies to more than just qt-core. If the reason for the hyphen is to have some kind of major/minor category organization then it really makes sense to not create a new major category just for qt since we'll only have one category for it. x11-qt or dev-qt are probably the best fits with what is there now. If we want to create a new major category then maybe some kind of general category for large development toolkits would make sense, but I just don't see the demand. I do support the idea of a new category for qt though, if they really are going to have upwards of 40 packages. That would put x11-libs up to 180 packages, and qt would be 20% of them. Rich
