On Sun, 26 Mar 2000, Moshe Zadka wrote: > On Sun, 26 Mar 2000, Greg Stein wrote: >... > > 2) you're pushing too hard. modules do not *have* to go into a package. > > there are some placements that you've made which are very > > questionable... it appears they are done for movement's sake rather > > than for being "right" > > Well, I'm certainly sorry I gave that impression -- the reason I wans't > "right" wasn't that, it was more my desire to be "fast" -- I wanted to > have some proposal out the door, since it is harder to argue about > something concrete. The biggest prrof of concept that we all agree is that > no one seriously took objections to anything -- there were just some minor > nits to pick. Not something to apologize for! :-) Well, the indicator was the line in your original post about "unhandled modules" and the conversation between you and Ping with statements along the lines of "wasn't sure where to put this." I say just leave it then :-) If a module does not make *obvious* sense to be in a package, then it should not be there. For example: locale. That is not about numbers or about text. It has general utility. If there was an i18n package, then it would go there. Otherwise, don't force it somewhere else. Other packages are similar, so don't single out my comment about locale. Cheers, -g -- Greg Stein, http://www.lyra.org/
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4