Date: Mon, 14 Apr 1997 21:42:41 -0700 (PDT) From: asami@vader.cs.berkeley.edu (Satoshi Asami) To: jfieber@indiana.edu Cc: obrien@freefall.freebsd.org, CVS-committers@freefall.freebsd.org, cvs-all@freefall.freebsd.org, cvs-ports@freefall.freebsd.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: ports/print/bibcard - Imported sources Message-ID: <199704150442.VAA11902@silvia.HIP.Berkeley.EDU> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.3.96.970411121142.16978I-100000@fallout.campusview.indiana.edu> (message from John Fieber on Fri, 11 Apr 1997 12:48:45 -0500 (EST))
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
* classified. Here we have a case of a bilbliographic DATABASE * management tool being classified as print because it is * indirectly related to TeX through a database format that bibtex * uses. I've already explained why this sort of criteria is This program is a desktop publishing tool as well as a database management program. They are both. Why is this so hard to understand? * It may be a different point of view, but it is sloppy regardless. No. There are many ports that belong to several categories. * Think about it. What IS bibcard? A tool for managing * bibliographic DATABASES. Do we have a database category? Yes! You are just stating your preference, your point of view. What "IS" is not the only criteria, and even if we decide make that the case, what something "actually is" is often not clear. Satoshi
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199704150442.VAA11902>