Hi,
While browsing packages in aptitude, I ran into some packages that, to
me, seem to be in the wrong section (or at least it's not obvious why
they are in the section they are). Section: python seems to be
especially bad, I wonder if the rationale was just it was written in
Python. These all
On Sat, May 24, 2008 at 11:22 AM, Sami Liedes [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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.)
Me agrees. Looks
Tshepang Lekhonkhobe schrieb:
On Sat, May 24, 2008 at 11:22 AM, Sami Liedes [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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
(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
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
5 matches
Mail list logo
