Date: Sun, 8 Jun 2014 00:16:18 +0400 From: Lev Serebryakov <lev@FreeBSD.org> To: ports@FreeBSD.org Subject: Splitting devel/subversion into SEVERAL ports -- how fine-grained do we want to see it? Message-ID: <1438330868.20140608001618@serebryakov.spb.ru>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hello, Ports.
I've learned proper way to split subversion into several ports. Question
is: how fine-grained should I do this? I want to split it at least into:
(1) devel/subversion-libs -- base libs, used by all other ports. Options
about SERF, BDB and SASL goes here.
(2) devel/subversion-client -- all base tools, like "svn", "svnversion" and
so on, but not "svnserve".
(3) devel/subversion-server -- svnserve binary.
(4) devel/subversion-tools -- additional tools (option now).
(5) devel/subversion-apache -- all mod_dav_svn-related stuff.
(6) devel/subversion-gnome -- GNOME KEyRing integration (option now).
(7) devel/subversion-kde -- KDE KWallet integration (option now).
(8) devel/subversion -- meta-port with options (and real stuff, like
patches and all infrastructure).
But it is possible to extract more options to separate ports: BDB repository
format, remote access with "svn:" scheme and SERF support ("http:" scheme
remote access) could be separate ports (and packages), not options! But
maybe, it is "too much" already?
--
// Black Lion AKA Lev Serebryakov <lev@FreeBSD.org>
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?1438330868.20140608001618>