Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2015 06:47:44 +0000 From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org To: freebsd-ports-bugs@FreeBSD.org Subject: [Bug 195985] [MAINTAINER] java/eclipse: Update to 4.4.1 Message-ID: <bug-195985-13-rNf0YOUKAS@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/> In-Reply-To: <bug-195985-13@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/> References: <bug-195985-13@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=195985 --- Comment #9 from John Marino <marino@FreeBSD.org> --- Okay, wow, these are not in good shape collectively. I understand that you tested with eclipse 4.4.1, but I can infer many of these marked "don't work" probably don't work for the current version of eclipse either. in one particular case you have "use aptana-3" in 4 places, but of course aptana-3 doesn't exist in ports. So I propose that you break this list up into 4 categories: category 1) completely ok, no action required category 2) hopeless, mark it for removal in 4 weeks category 3) mark "ignore" with a message that it will be updated soon category 4) new ports that must be created. Let's be pretty agressive here. If it works or mostly works, but an update is available or it should be converted to native (whatever that means) then put it in category 3. Any extension that you think isn't worth time, just dump in category 2. Category 4 may have very few entries, e.g. one, aptana-3 >From what I can tell, most extensions will end up in category 2 destined for removal and that's fine with me. Can you make the call on each extension? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?bug-195985-13-rNf0YOUKAS>