[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: [pimlott@idiomtech.com: perl package sections]



Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@debian.org> writes:

> >>"Joey" == Joey Hess <joey@kitenet.net> writes:

>  Joey> Why interpreters? Wouldn't libs make more sense? It doesn't
>  Joey> matter if the language a library is written in is interpreted
>  Joey> or not, it's still a library..

>         libs is getting huge. An easy way to split it out was to move
>  the interpreted libs out of there -- makes it easier to find stuff.

Yes!  OTOH, if we move all the perl libs to interpreters, then
interpreters will start to get pretty big too.

Also, in response to the original point, if I'm looking for a mail
tool of some sort, and I happen to notice that there's a perl library
for mail, I might well consider using that to whip something together
to meet my needs.  Whereas if the perl mail libraries are off in libs
or interpreters, I may never notice them, and end up either using an
existing-but-inadequate tool or giving up entirely.

I'm not entirely opposed to the idea of moving all the perl libs, just
pointing out that there is an argument on the other side.  I have a
mild preference for putting special-purpose perl libs in the
appropriate sections, rather than all in interpreters, but it's only a
mild preference.
-- 
Chris Waters   xtifr@dsp.net | I have a truly elegant proof of the
      or    xtifr@debian.org | above, but it is too long to fit into
http://www.dsp.net/xtifr     | this .signature file.


Reply to: