From owner-freebsd-ports  Wed Jan 15 19:23:08 1997
Return-Path: <owner-ports>
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.4/8.8.4) id TAA23418
          for ports-outgoing; Wed, 15 Jan 1997 19:23:08 -0800 (PST)
Received: from fallout.campusview.indiana.edu (fallout.campusview.indiana.edu [149.159.1.1])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.4/8.8.4) with ESMTP id TAA23413
          for <ports@freebsd.org>; Wed, 15 Jan 1997 19:23:04 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (jfieber@localhost)
          by fallout.campusview.indiana.edu (8.8.4/8.8.4) with SMTP
	  id WAA20549; Wed, 15 Jan 1997 22:23:01 -0500 (EST)
Date: Wed, 15 Jan 1997 22:23:00 -0500 (EST)
From: John Fieber <jfieber@indiana.edu>
To: Chuck Robey <chuckr@glue.umd.edu>
cc: ports@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: Ports status / category quandry
In-Reply-To: <Pine.OSF.3.95.970115214945.2239E-100000@baud.eng.umd.edu>
Message-ID: <Pine.BSI.3.95.970115221128.264q-100000@fallout.campusview.indiana.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-ports@freebsd.org
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, 15 Jan 1997, Chuck Robey wrote:

> >   2) This port really wants to be in a "text processing"
> >      category.  In fact, in the misc category, it has a few other lost
> >      friends like glimpse, ispell, mgdiff, recode, rman, and trans.
> >      Opinions on a "Text" category?
> 
> "print" category, it already exists, ghostscript, gv, tex, stuff like
> that.

No.

That would be like putting the perl5 port in the database
category because you can use it in a database project. There is
overlap between text processing and printing applications, but
putting equating the two is a serious classification error.

A printing application might make use of SGML, but SGML is *not*
a printing application by any stretch of the definition.  It
doesn't belong in printing any more than ispell or recode does.

-john