Re: Golang mudules to follow common grouping

[Sharlatan Hellseher <sharlatanus@gmail.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1304 bytes --]

Hi Christina,

> Would it be more organized if they was just one order: either
> in alphabetical order or grouped by function? My suggestion
> would be to use the file split to group by function and then sort
> each file alphabetically. Do you know how it is arranged for other
> languages?

I've added comments in commentary section in the top of the file
asking to keep packages alphabetically sorted seen in
julia-xyz.scm as well. python-*.scm ordered semi random grouped
closer to package purpose which require more thinking where to put a new
one : -)

> Another question I have: Is there any tooling that can help big package
> migrations like this go faster? Eg. a script to split one big diff into
> individual package moves with appropriate change-log entries.

Good point her, I did manual split, with Emacs keyboard macros,
magit history scan for copyright lines and manual check where
package was used to include new module name.

The split into golang-crypto is in review now and there would be 2 more
common grouping: golang-compression and golang-build (or
golang-extension). Rest packages which are hard to determine a
group wound go to generic golang-xyz sorted alphabetically.

Let me know your tooling which you familiar with I might think
about some sort of automation.

Thanks,
Oleg

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2478 bytes --]