On 04/18/17 04:04, Kamil Rytarowski wrote:
I agree about antlr. I must have been thinking of natural language processing when I categorized it as science.On 17.04.2017 17:19, Jason Bacon wrote:Packages in wip that should be in science category: antlrI would be surprised to find a compiler tool like antlr or flex in science/. If there is going to be a rearrangement of packages I would be in favor of removing CATEGORY as it happens to be imperfect and go for: $FIRSTCHARACTER/$SECONDCHARACTER/$PACKAGE This way antlr would be in: a/n/antlr and flex in f/l/flex. I expect that most people rather use some grep(1) or pkgsrc.se-like website to search packages of a matching category (text in DESCR or COMMENT). Any other movement from my experience makes things more messy - a lot of work for developers, confusion for users. I already saw both groups of people frustrated in a Linux distro (Mageia).
I'm not sure what your concern is about messiness. We're talking about a new category for mostly new packages. Yes, some existing packages may be moved to science and dependents will need to be updated, but that's easy and will probably happen very slowly anyway.
I suspect the reason a science category doesn't already exist is simply lack of critical mass. That critical mass is coming now, as pkgsrc is growing very quickly.
FYI, pkgsrc has a huge potential impact on scientific computing and research in general. Most HPC clusters run CentOS, which deliberately uses older compilers, kernels and core libraries for the sake of stability and binary compatibility for commercial software. This makes it problematic for the latest versions of many open source packages. I see scientists struggling with this all the time. Pkgsrc is far and away the best existing solution to this problem and we're starting to raise awareness in the scientific community. The number of scientific packages is likely to grow at an accelerating rate as more scientists warm up to pkgsrc.
Regards,
Jason
--
Earth is a beta site.