From owner-freebsd-ports Mon Feb 14 13:57:31 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from jade.chc-chimes.com (jade.chc-chimes.com [216.28.46.6]) by builder.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C19824A3D; Mon, 14 Feb 2000 13:56:41 -0800 (PST) Received: by jade.chc-chimes.com (Postfix, from userid 1001) id 9D25D1C4A; Mon, 14 Feb 2000 16:57:00 -0500 (EST) Date: Mon, 14 Feb 2000 16:57:00 -0500 From: Bill Fumerola To: Richard Wackerbarth Cc: David O'Brien , asami@FreeBSD.ORG, FreeBSD Ports Subject: Re: multi-level categories Message-ID: <20000214165700.M92177@jade.chc-chimes.com> References: <20000214115757.B75380@dragon.nuxi.com> <00021415283600.07461@nomad.dataplex.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 1.0i In-Reply-To: <00021415283600.07461@nomad.dataplex.net>; from rkw@dataplex.net on Mon, Feb 14, 2000 at 03:05:19PM -0600 X-Operating-System: FreeBSD 3.2-RELEASE i386 Sender: owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Mon, Feb 14, 2000 at 03:05:19PM -0600, Richard Wackerbarth wrote: > > I would prefer pkg_COMMENT or pkg.COMMENT to make things easier to read. > How about simply COMMENT ? > > I fail to see a namespace conflict within the port's directory. > > The other extreme would be COMMENT.zsh-3.4 or some equivalent syntax which > creates a globally unique name. > Although I can see some benefits to globally unique names, I think the value > is too low. If a script needs to extract then into a flat directory, it can > rename them on the way. (1) If you don't have a mailer that does 80 columns properly, please press that big "enter" key on your keyboard when you get to the end of a line. I recovered what you did above. (2) For those of us used to typing pkgCOMMENT or whatever, this would help us. (3) It's good for ordering. > What is the motivation to treat scripts and patches differently? > > crypto/stealth/ > .../Makefile > .../COMMENTS > .../CHECKSUMS > ... > .../patch-aa > .../patch-ab > .../script-preload > .../script-register-with-authorities > .../script-confiscate-munitions > ... > I think they would still fit on one page. Not when there is an obnoxious amount of patches. I think that patches, files, and scripts should all be in one directory. I also know however that this would be a hyper-bitch for repository copying with only a little gain. I like Satoshi's suggestion combined with David's suggestion of pkg.FOO or pkg_FOO (prefering pkg.FOO). -- Bill Fumerola - Network Architect Computer Horizons Corp - CVM e-mail: billf@chc-chimes.com / billf@FreeBSD.org Office: 800-252-2421 x128 / Cell: 248-761-7272 To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message