On 19 January 2013 23:38, Michael Weber <x...@gentoo.org> wrote: > We have a fixed number of exact 2 tags (foo and bar), > This limitation has proven it's usability in the past of Gentoo, but > there are reasons to break it up (Like making up funny points like regex > and it has always been this way). foo-bar-baz might be usefull, too.
That's just convention, not a limitation. We already have virtual/ which breaks the convention. There is nothing, except resistance to change, that requires us to follow the convention. > But it's plain redundacy to in insist on *qt*/qt-*. Agreed, though some people seem to prefer that. > Either reject using an appropriate category and place it > as misc-randoom/qt-* or use a category and strip the "qt-" prefix. > > I'm fine with qt/core, my preference would be lib-qt/core or lib/qt-core. We don't have lib-* categories now, and I don't see why we should use qt to start that. Besides, this whole discussion got started initially because we were asking ourselves where to place the *applications* (designer and linguist) that we want to split off from qt-gui and give separate ebuilds. They are not libs, strictly spoken. So that brought up, for us in the Qt team, that maybe it's time to have our own category. This is why I prefer plain "qt", or alternatively "dev-qt" or "qt-framework". The more concise, the better. -- Cheers, Ben | yngwin Gentoo developer Gentoo Qt project lead, Gentoo Wiki admin
