On Mon, Sep 4, 2017 at 12:48 AM, Kent Fredric <ken...@gentoo.org> wrote:
> I'm tempted to suggest something like "ux-", which conceptually
> encompasses GUI/UI/Display concerns, and having an "x" gives a nod to
> its legacy as being "x" without it being part of the definition :)
>
UX is overly broad, as I could, for example, design a CLI user
experience. Nothing says I need to use images or a mouse. There is
also the unrelated concern of mine that UX is a fake term that people
made up so that they could charge consulting fees to people who don't
know any better.
Inasmuch as my membership to this list makes my opinion valid, I think
"desktop-*" is a very good solution. A desktop is a paradigm that some
would say is intrinsically linked to a graphical user interface.
People who use tiling or other experimental window managers might see
a desktop as something a graphical input system can implement, in
which case "gui-*" could be the most technically generic term. I see
no problem with putting programs like `xset` into "gui-tools/*".
There may not be any reason to change, as the distinctions in place
seem to already be quite arbitrary. Having nested package namespaces
might make things better because then you are forced to define the
logical relationships between namespaces in a way that is not open to
as much interpretation.
Respectfully,
R0b0t1
