[arch-dev-public] why?

[Damir Perisa]

Thursday 19 July 2007, Dale Blount wrote:
 | On Thu, 2007-07-19 at 14:02 -0500, Aaron Griffin wrote:
 | > On 7/19/07, Damir Perisa <damir.perisa at solnet.ch> wrote:
 | > > * why renaming the current repo? current and extra make
 | > > perfectly sense in the KISS approach to me.
 | >
 | > My biggest problem is grammar.  "current" and "extra" don't
 | > follow each other.  "less" and "more", "east" and "west",
 | > "monday" and "saturday" - all these words are related in some
 | > way.
 | >
 | > "current" and "extra" don't make any sense? If "current" is
 | > current, does that mean extra is not current? Is current more up
 | > to date than current? "extra" what? More extra than "current"?
 | > Does that mean it's from the future?
 |
 | [base] and [extra] make much more sense to me.  Especially when
 | you get into the fact that we tag packages in [current] with
 | CURRENT and packages in [extra] are also tagged CURRENT.  Man, I
 | was a confused dev when that first happened.

true - you both of you are right. the naming was not linguistically 
correct in the beginnning. but it worked for years *smile* 

if we change the name, "base" makes more sense as do "core". "core" 
or -- introducing another name -- "nucleus" would be everything from 
the base category we have now + some other pkgs? 

if there is really a mature reason to rename a repository, then go for 
it... but be aware that this would break backwards compatibility 
becasue on all the cd's and installers till now (ftp install 
especially), we have the naming hardcoded. actually, thinking 
forward-projected, it would be not too bad, if the installer if 
trying to use any online-repositories (compared to offline 
install-media provided repositories) would first synch a 
information-file what archlinux offers for stuff atm.

- D

-- 

.·´¯`·.¸.·´¯`·.¸¸.·´¯`·.¸.·´¯`·.¸.·´¯`·.¸.·´¯`·.¸¸.·´
            °        °           °
             °      °            °
     ><((((º>      °              °
                    °            °
                   °            <º)))><
                  <º)))><

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: <http://archlinux.org/pipermail/arch-dev-public/attachments/20070719/c4c5f56e/attachment.pgp>