Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2005 22:59:09 -0700 From: Wes Peters <wes@softweyr.com> To: linimon@lonesome.com (Mark Linimon) Cc: freebsd-java@FreeBSD.org, freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.org, freebsd-eclipse@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: [SUGGEST] Reform eclipse and eclipse related ports Message-ID: <8347452E-908C-4BE5-AC8F-E6378C1BF17C@softweyr.com> In-Reply-To: <20051015053003.GB28137@soaustin.net> References: <200510150015.j9F0ExKr085847@sakura.ninth-nine.com> <E14F38B2-B1AF-415F-AE6B-A4BE6330A83D@opensail.org> <20051015053003.GB28137@soaustin.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Oct 14, 2005, at 10:30 PM, Mark Linimon wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 14, 2005 at 09:15:07PM -0700, Wes Peters wrote:
>
>> I don't mind moving the eclipse ports from java to devel, but all the
>> other eclipse ports are add-ins to eclipse and should probably be
>> classified along with eclipse.
>
> [adding freebsd-java to the Cc:]
>
> For some background, there's been on-and-off discussion on -java
> about how the java category was never really a good idea. None of
> the other languages have their own primary category. In particular
> we've completely failed to train our users to send 'java' PRs only
> for problems with the JVMs and 'ports' PRs for things in ports/java.
Makes you wonder how much the rest of the ports system would be
cleaned up with a 'perl' category and all those p5-something-
something ports got tossed into that basket, doesn't it?
>> In particular, if eclipse is a 'devel' tool, I don't see how CDT
>> and phpeclipse are editors. GEF isn't a graphics library, it's a
>> graphical emulation framework for eclipse, which is (again) a
>> development tool.
>
> Well, Eclipse is one of these 'suites' that doesn't really fit well
> in one particular category. You could make the same argument about
> OpenOffice, opengroupware, ZendStudio, and so forth. (These 3 are
> chosen deliberately because they're scattered in 3 different
> categories).
>
> OpenBSD has a 'productivity' category although what it has in it is
> more
> like our 'deskutils'. Perhaps we should consider co-opting that name?
I don't know that 'productivity' really describes what these are. In
particular, I'm not sure if opengroupware adds productivity or
subtracts it. ;^) Ditto for eclipse, for that matter. A category
name that means 'big blobs of software with lots of options' might be
appropriate.
> (Our "deskutils" is a combination of things like calendar programs and
> individual GNOME add-ons, so it's a little bit of a mixed bag.
> However,
> I'm not sure I can see Eclipse fitting in with those).
>
> There is also the fact to consider that at 1624 ports, devel is simply
> too huge for its own good. Everything is in there including the
> kitchen sink.
devel is one of several categories that has grown useless; www is
another. It's certainly worth thinking about a category that
actually makes sense for these large software systems like openoffice
and eclipse.
> Even if we just went with an 'ide' category, there are still 27 ports
> that would probably fit in there. Not a lot in my book (and I've
> always
> been against anything that would lead us towards having hundreds of
> categories), but I could see an argument for it, even so.
>
> I'll leave the idea of completely reshuffling all the categories for
> another time, since everyone is probably tired of listening to my own
> particular views on that.
>
> mcl
>
--
Where am I, and what am I doing in this handbasket?
Wes Peters
wes@softweyr.com
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?8347452E-908C-4BE5-AC8F-E6378C1BF17C>