Re: [sc-dev] its time for a User library

[ronald kuivila <rkuivila@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Mar 1, 2006, at 5:36 PM, Julian Rohrhuber wrote:

> > >  I'd love if we could have repositories of mixed authorship.  
> > > While in some cases it is better to keep separate (flue etc.) it  
> > > makes the repository more valuable if it is systematic. I do know  
> > > some things that ron and you create, but maybe we should work  
> > > together on the forensics.
> > >  --
> >
> > Hi Julian,
> >
> >  Certainly one big issue with SC is that there are several  
> > different dialects/approaches coexisting within one language.
> >   This is a feature, not a bug, but it would be really helpful to  
> > have a simple way to help clarify what belongs with what and why.
> >
> >   Perhaps we could adopt a convention of having an explanatory  
> > file for each directory of help files that describes what that  
> > group does.
> >   This happens already (CrucialLibrary, for example), but is not  
> > set up in any consistent way.
> >   Then help files could have their path name displayed so that you  
> > can get to the right explanatory file.
>
>
>
> Hi Ron,
>
> I do agree that there is different approaches and that everything  
> specific to a certain approach should stay there. But I think there  
> are other pieces of code that do not so much belong to a certain  
> "personal" approach, but to topics like "data mining". Also there  
> might be specific approaches that should better be called what they  
> are and not who started them - this makes contributions by others  
> more logical. (imagine James had named "Common" "McCartneyLib")
> --

Hi Julian,

 I completely agree.  But doesn't that correspond to migrating  
specific classes out of a UserLib and into Common?



RJK