Luis Medinas wrote:
> There's a problem with this. A few packages i listed could be part of
> sci-crystallography too. If we start this new category we should had a
> few more related packages otherwise we will have this category empty.
> Another thing is who is really insterested in creating this
On Sat, Jul 1, 2006 at 13:36:10 +0200, George Shapovalov wrote:
> Hi gang
>
> It looks like we got all the coments we could get, so lets get done with it
> then. What's left is minor legwork that is best done by the maintainers of
> the individual herds, here is the approximate list:
math-pro
субота, 1. липень 2006 13:02, Luis Medinas Ви написали:
> On Sat, 2006-07-01 at 12:29 +0200, George Shapovalov wrote:
> > sci-physics - many packages were listed, so a candidate, but I did not
> > get a clear impression of how "finalized" the idea was and how many
> > people finally decided to stay
On Sat, 2006-07-01 at 12:29 +0200, George Shapovalov wrote:
> sci-physics - many packages were listed, so a candidate, but I did not get a
> clear impression of how "finalized" the idea was and how many people finally
> decided to stay behind it.
There's a problem with this. A few packages i lis
Hi gang
It looks like we got all the coments we could get, so lets get done with it
then. What's left is minor legwork that is best done by the maintainers of
the individual herds, here is the approximate list:
Herds:
0. If you feel you did not polish up the idea of a particular herd or catego
On Mon, Jun 26, 2006 at 14:26:16 +0200, George Shapovalov wrote:
> sci-mathematics: 34
> Ok size. There were calls to split it into symbolic and numeric, also -proof
> was suggested (but I understand the packages for that one are not in the tree
> yet). 3-tier categories might be nice here :) (
Hi Simon
Thanks for the clarification!
неділя, 25. червень 2006 22:17, Simon Stelling Ви написали:
> i'm not maintaining anything, just keywording it for amd64. wouldn't it be
> easier to only list people that are in the sci herd?
No, because there are people who are not on sci herd but who maint
George Shapovalov wrote:
> sci-biology: 58
> rather large, may be worth splitting more, no particular suggestions yet
> though, devs:
> ribosome, blubb, corsair, j4rg0n, mcummings, sediener, pbienst, apokorny,
> hansmi?, phosphan, lostlogic?
i'm not maintaining anything, just keywording it for
First, thanks to everybody who responded! (not that tehre were many ;)).
Interestingly, the most positive result so far seems to be two people
expressing interest to join :), so we need at least one more mentor I'd say..
I'll start by refreshing general changes that were proposed:
1. Make Scient
This seems to have never made it to the list, resending..
Hi everybody.
Sorry for crossposting, but many people whom I want to catch with this are not
on gentoo-science. For the same reason lets keep this initial discussion
here, on -dev. If we need to expand, lets take it to the gentoo-science
Hi everybody.
Sorry for crossposting, but many people whom I want to catch with this are not
on gentoo-science. For the same reason lets keep this initial discussion
here, on -dev. If we need to expand, lets take it to the gentoo-science, but
then I would expect everybody interested to sign up
11 matches
Mail list logo
