From owner-freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Mon May 15 18:33:36 2017 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1E56CD6EBC0 for ; Mon, 15 May 2017 18:33:36 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from ros@bebik.net) Received: from smtp.osorio.me (smtp.osorio.me [5.196.94.126]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DD7A8B10; Mon, 15 May 2017 18:33:35 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from ros@bebik.net) Received: from [192.168.1.117] (unknown [78.194.61.125]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.osorio.me (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 45619197A7; Mon, 15 May 2017 18:25:16 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Re: How should we name node-js ports ? To: Ruslan Makhmatkhanov , freebsd-ports@freebsd.org References: <32cbf11f-5ce0-ce16-8c56-c45d585ed2f6@FreeBSD.org> From: Rodrigo Osorio Message-ID: <682a272e-939b-93aa-44c1-51b7286b07e4@bebik.net> Date: Mon, 15 May 2017 20:25:15 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <32cbf11f-5ce0-ce16-8c56-c45d585ed2f6@FreeBSD.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Language: en-US X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 15 May 2017 18:33:36 -0000 On 05/15/17 14:57, Ruslan Makhmatkhanov wrote: > Rodrigo Osorio wrote on 05/14/2017 15:16: >> Hi, >> >> I have a bunch of nodejs ports to add, most of them as dependencies, >> and I wonder if we can find a naming standard like adding 'node' or >> 'node-js' prefix in the name ; I personally prefer 'node'. >> >> As a result a port who install the node package xxx will be named >> 'node-xxx' >> >> Does it sounds good to you ? >> >> Thanks for your time, >> >> -- rodrigo > > Am I right they will be actually installed with npm? If so, it would > make sense to name them npm-, like rubygems installed packages. > Hi Ruslan, That sounds good to me, if everyone agrees we can move this way. -- rodrigo