<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
<title></title>
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
Richard Hughes wrote:
<blockquote cite="mid:1193766108.2827.9.camel@hughsie-laptop"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">On Tue, 2007-10-30 at 08:01 +0100, Tim Lauridsen wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">GROUP_PROGRAMMING_WEB, GROUP_PROGRAMMING_JAVA, GROUP_PROGRAMMING_WEB?
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">Fine to me, but why GROUP_PROGRAMMING_WEB twice :)
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->
I've added the rest, but I'm not sure how much we want to split the
programming classes. I really don't want
GROUP_PROGRAMMING_{every_language_known_to_man} in the enum list.
</pre>
</blockquote>
I Agree .<br>
<pre wrap="">GROUP_PROGRAMMING_COBOL, GROUP_PROGRAMMING_PL1 etc is a bad idea
But here are some candidates:
GROUP_PROGRAMMING_LIBS
GROUP_PROGRAMMING_GNOME
GROUP_PROGRAMMING_KDE
GROUP_PROGRAMMING_TOOLS
It would be a good idea to split up the GROUP_DESKTOPS group
GROUP_DESKTOPS_GNOME
GROUP_DESKTOPS_KDE
GROUP_DESKTOPS_XFCE
A Gnome user will want to look at Gnome apps and a KDE user want to see KDE apps etc.
I still think some kind of TreeView with the be better as the number of groups grow.
-Programing (GROUP_PROGRAMMING)
Libraries (GROUP_PROGRAMMING_LIBS)
Gnome (GROUP_PROGRAMMING_GNOME)
KDE (GROUP_PROGRAMMING_KDE)
Tools (GROUP_PROGRAMMING_TOOLS)
-Desktop (GROUP_DESKTOPS)
GNOME (GROUP_DESKTOPS_GNOME)
KDE (GROUP_DESKTOPS_KDE)
XFCE (GROUP_DESKTOPS_XFCE)
Tim
</pre>
<br>
</body>
</html>