From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG  Mon May 28 01:47:51 2007
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG>
X-Original-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org
Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 82A4E16A46B
	for <freebsd-ports@freebsd.org>; Mon, 28 May 2007 01:47:51 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from linimon@lonesome.com)
Received: from mail.soaustin.net (mail.soaustin.net [207.200.4.66])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 691A213C469
	for <freebsd-ports@freebsd.org>; Mon, 28 May 2007 01:47:51 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from linimon@lonesome.com)
Received: by mail.soaustin.net (Postfix, from userid 502)
	id 2CF86AE4; Sun, 27 May 2007 20:47:51 -0500 (CDT)
Date: Sun, 27 May 2007 20:47:51 -0500
To: Edwin Groothuis <edwin@mavetju.org>
Message-ID: <20070528014751.GB24097@soaustin.net>
References: <20070527190053.41a88e30@l140.fem.tu-ilmenau.de>
	<20070528001611.GA1361@k7.mavetju>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20070528001611.GA1361@k7.mavetju>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.9i
From: linimon@lonesome.com (Mark Linimon)
Cc: Hagen K?hl <hagen.kuehl@stud.tu-ilmenau.de>, freebsd-ports@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: xorg modularity
X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD <freebsd-ports.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports>,
	<mailto:freebsd-ports-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-ports>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-ports@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-ports-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports>,
	<mailto:freebsd-ports-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 28 May 2007 01:47:51 -0000

On Mon, May 28, 2007 at 10:16:11AM +1000, Edwin Groothuis wrote:
> It has been discussed on IRC, and I'm pretty sure that flz@ has
> been thinking about it during his sweat-shop-job. My opinion is:
> let's do the upgrade to 7.2 and the new framework first, then see
> what can be done about OPTIONizing it.

My own feeling that is if we had spent the time trying to futher
divide it up, it would have taken more time for our long-suffering folks
to get it into the tree.  That said, there's a lot of the demo and
developer junk that few people need.

Maybe I can talk myself into graphing the dependencies this week, that
might make it possible to visualize it.

mcl