From owner-freebsd-eclipse@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Aug 31 21:36:15 2005 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-eclipse@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-eclipse@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8855316A41F; Wed, 31 Aug 2005 21:36:15 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from vizion@vizion.occoxmail.com) Received: from lakecmmtao05.coxmail.com (lakecmmtao05.coxmail.com [68.99.120.79]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D074143D46; Wed, 31 Aug 2005 21:36:14 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from vizion@vizion.occoxmail.com) Received: from dns1 ([64.58.171.82]) by lakecmmtao05.coxmail.com (InterMail vM.6.01.05.02 201-2131-123-102-20050715) with ESMTP id <20050831213614.QVQN2425.lakecmmtao05.coxmail.com@dns1>; Wed, 31 Aug 2005 17:36:14 -0400 From: Vizion To: Mark Linimon Date: Wed, 31 Aug 2005 14:32:09 -0700 User-Agent: KMail/1.8 References: <200508251303.59453.vizion@vizion.occoxmail.com> <200508310829.03121.vizion@vizion.occoxmail.com> <20050831204000.GA10673@soaustin.net> In-Reply-To: <20050831204000.GA10673@soaustin.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200508311432.10822.vizion@vizion.occoxmail.com> Cc: Herve Quiroz , freebsd-eclipse@freebsd.org Subject: Re: How should eclipse be organized in the ports tree? X-BeenThere: freebsd-eclipse@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "FreeBSD users of eclipse EDI, tools, rich client apps & ports." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 31 Aug 2005 21:36:15 -0000 On Wednesday 31 August 2005 13:40, the author Mark Linimon contributed to the dialogue on- Re: How should eclipse be organized in the ports tree?: >> >First of all, a plugin's jar file is essentially its distfile, currently >> >downloaded by the ports system in ports/distfiles or its subdirectories. >> >Storing it in the ports CVS repository (in ports/eclipse/plugins), as >> >you seem to imply, would in some cases be problematic because of >> >licensing/redistribution issues (not to mention bloat). > >OK, I missed this part the first time around. I thought that you >were talking about having a way to _fetch_ all the jarfiles in the >subport -- not the jarfiles themselves. I shortcircuited that one - I was thinking of a *.jar file (call this a *collect.jar )to load the correct plugineclipse jar file which presumably would then be ports/distfiles > >The problem is that the jarfiles are large, and everyone who has a >copy of the ports collection would have to have them -- even people >who do not use eclipse. There is also the fact that, being binaries, >every time they change they would essentially be a complete new copy >in the CVS repository. Agreed that would be far too messy > >We currently do not have many (any?) binaries in the CVS repository >and it probably ought to stay that way. CVS is much more efficient >for text files. > >I would instead rather see a port that, when you update it, goes >though the latest list of jarfiles and fetches them into a single >subdirectory of ports/distfiles (e.g. ports/distfiles/eclipse-plugins/). Yep that would work >That unifies the search function without penalizing anyone who does not >wish to install the eclipse ports. This also disentangles us from >licensing problems. makes sense the key to doing it this way is to get what I have called *collect.jar files in a single directory in the ports tree! > >mcl -- 40 yrs navigating and computing in blue waters. English Owner & Captain of British Registered 60' bluewater Ketch S/V Taurus. Currently in San Diego, CA. Sailing bound for Europe via Panama Canal after completing engineroom refit.