Hi,
I'm not yet convinced that it's entirely necessary. What's the harm in having all of these things in opt? I agree it's not necessary... OTOH it seemed like it wouldn't matter
Hi, On Thu, May 26, 2005 at 09:12:20 -0700, Jay Dolan wrote: that much in the end, and keeping the separation and renaming the current 'contrib' to something else would allow us to start the new contrib soon, without depending on any hosting issues. Mainly, this would allow us to focus on other things, while having a clear situation for CRUX users (a situation which I hope will be stable for some time). Also, it seemed to me that it would be clearer to the user to see that base and opt is on the CD. If only a subset of opt is on the CD, there's some kind of implicit partitioning of 'opt' anyway; expressing that with two collection names (which have the same historical meaning as opt/contrib now) would make that even more clear. That said, I'm really fine with either solution, but wanted to add these arguments to clarify my initial posting. I guess that we'll hear more opinions from other CLC guys as well, so let's wait a bit before we count votes :-). Kind regards, Johannes -- Johannes Winkelmann mailto:jw@tks6.net Bern, Switzerland http://jw.tks6.net