> I added another section named "Analysis", that contains general data
> analysis/plotting/calculation applications. I find them very similar to
> what is found in "Math", so I consider moving "Mathematics" to "Science"
> a good idea.
Again: we see that scientists make heavy use of mathematics,
I went on and made a list of applications that are currently found in
"Science" [science] and another one with these applications roughly
sorted into sections [science_sorted].
The short version:
Analysis [10]
Astronomy [12]
Biology [16]
Chemistry [11]
Geoscience [5]
Medicine [1]
Physics [
FYI: The status of the debian-policy source package
in Debian's testing distribution has changed.
Previous version: 3.6.2.2
Current version: 3.7.2.0
--
This email is automatically generated; [EMAIL PROTECTED] is responsible.
See http://people.debian.org/~henning/trille/ for more information
Do not ignore me pleasbe,
I found your email somewhere and now decided to warite you.
I am coming to your place in faew weeks and thoaught we
can meet each other. Let me knoaw ifa you do not mind.
I am a nice pbretty girl. Don't reply to this email.
Email me direcalty at [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
Package: debian-policy
Version: 3.7.2.0
Severity: minor
In section 10.4, the current Policy is inconsistent. It says:
,
| The standard shell interpreter /bin/sh can be a symbolic link to any
| POSIX compatible shell, if echo -n does not generate a newline.[59]
| Thus, shell scripts specifyin
Frank Küster wrote:
> That's a nice exercise, but the interesting question is whether we
> actually have enough *packages* so that their creation makes sense.
Quite frankly, I do not (yet) know if there is a need for each
subsection I listed, but there is no reason for not being forward
compatib
Thomas Walter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On Sun, 2006-05-14 at 19:20, Bill Allombert wrote:
>> On Sun, May 14, 2006 at 06:20:25PM +0200, Thomas Walter wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
>>
>> > In general, my understanding of "Science" is in the sense of research
>> > and not education.
>> > Thus a
Linas Žvirblis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I actually find splitting "Science" a good idea.
>
> I did a little research and came up with this list of possible
> subsections, along with example fields they cover:
>
> Astronomy
> * Astrodynamics
> * Astronomy
> * Astrophysics
> * Cosmology
> *
8 matches
Mail list logo
