Re: multiple categories

[Guido Draheim]

Peter Simons schrieb:
> Guido Draheim writes:
>
>  > would you please now go to sfnet and have a look? The frontpage
>  > contains the main categories and it does not list any macro twice.
>
> At the moment, I don't worry about the _presentation_ of the archive's
> contents. All I worry about is:
>
>     Do we NEED to put a macro into more than one category? 
>
> I agree it would have benefits, but I also think it will make the
> whole system more complex to maintain and more difficult to get right
> for the submitters. Given these disadvantages, I am not convinced it
> is worth the effort.

(a) there is no need to use it, it's optional
(b) it is there when someone thinks it is good, and can use it.
(c) I had not problem implanting it, so I guess it is not "complex".
(d) the visualising does _not_ merge categories, there is
    exactly one primary category, the rest is marked _explicitly_
    and does not interfere with _managing_ the macros.

you ask for needs, personally I need it for experimental macros,
beyond that I just like it to get better overview pages, and it
is  actually possible, and quite easily, so there is no need to
reject the option when one can have it.

[btw, next time I answer ape man style... :-)=)]

>  > The per-category indexes lists only the macros in that category
>  > plus handful extra [...].
>
> If we decide to place macros into more than one category, I am sure we
> can find a way to present them in a sensible way. I worry exclusively
> about the added complexity and the benefits we gain from it, and so
> far I conclude that I would rather spend the time working on the
> _macros_ than on the infrastructure.

there is no added complexity, just optional things that do not get
it the way. If you feel that something can `get in the way`,
please speak up because I can not see it, nor the conclusion to
leave it out.

>  >> > The sfnet branch is shipping an `acinclude` copy of all the m4
>  >> > macros, and it is not a good idea to put them all into _one_
>  >> > directory.
>
>  >> Why not?
>
>  > [...]
>
> I feel your answer didn't really address the question ... _Why_ is it
> not a good idea to put all the macros in one directory?

experience. Ex cathedra it might not be a difference to have them
in one directory, but in reality it is no difference just for tools,
where it is a difference to humans. Again, just to pick up the example
again, even the core autoconf splits the macros into different
m4 files where in fact the tool could easily get away with just
one m4 file. Humans have it easier if it is split up, simple as
that, and if you do not see that now, well, just go ahead, put it
all in one place, and have your own set of experiences. Please
accept that I do not go back, 'cause I've been there, and 'didn't
like it anymore once the new way was there.

-- have fun, guido