Re: organize maltedmedia

On Sun, 2012-06-10 at 21:24 -0400, Aaron Wolfe wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 10, 2012 at 9:14 PM, Tony <tonym@...> wrote:
> 
> (snip)
> 
> >
> > OK - then as a group, let' come up with a scheme - Productivity and
> > Applications are both the same, well, Prod would be under Apps, I was
> > just jotting quickly, so drop Productivity, and just keep Applications.
> >
> > So something like:
> >
> > Apps
> > Drivers
> > Games
> > System
> > Utility
> >
> > ?
> 
> Sounds much better to me.
> 
> One item to think about is the big disk collections like the CFDM and
> various usergroups disk sets.  Those of course have some software from
> all of the above categories, but are also significant in their own
> right as a set.
> Takes us back to the age old problem of using a filesystem to arrange
> something that belongs in a database... hierarchical structures just
> don't fit the real world very often.  Keeping things general instead
> of trying to be overly specific helps with that but corner cases still
> always stink.
> Ideally we could all agree on some open, standard thing that allowed
> multiple fields of data (then a program might belong to several
> categories instead of being forced to pick just one).  Not sure if its
> possible though.
> 
> --
> Coco mailing list
> Coco@...
> http://five.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/coco
> 

Good point - But I'd leave those collections as-is, and in this exact
case, for example, have a CFDM folder to house those. That is a part of
our history, similar to the Fish Disks for Amigas.

Maybe add another category called Collections? Then maybe just the name
under, so like:

OS9
	Apps
	Drivers
	Games
	System
	Utility
DECB
	Apps
	Games
	System
	Utility
Collections
	CFDM
	RainbowOnDisk

?

--
Coco mailing list
Coco@...
http://five.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/coco