Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 6 Dec 2004 02:20:42 -0600 (CST)
From:      Mark Linimon <linimon@lonesome.com>
To:        Manfred Riem <mnriem@gmail.com>
Cc:        Mario Sergio Fujikawa Ferreira <lioux@freebsd.org>
Subject:   Re: ports/74696: net/xnap: Remove crosslisting in java category
Message-ID:  <Pine.LNX.4.44.0412060210210.10462-100000@pancho>
In-Reply-To: <37919c31041205145654f6ea3c@mail.gmail.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, 5 Dec 2004, Manfred Riem wrote:

> I was corrected by Herve on this question, the only thing that needs to
> be stated more clearly I think is that the PR submittal process should
> file to the primary listing and not to the java PR category.

I think you've failed to understand that we've been trying to move
towards the following: anything in the FreeBSD ports collection gets filed
under 'ports' in GNATS.  (Among other things, this will allow the PRs to
be tracked in portsmon, but that's besides the point).

I've been trying to advocate use the of the 'java' category in GNATS
to be 'things about the interaction of the Java Virtual Machine with
the FreeBSD kernel'.  In this, it would be a choice on a par with
'kern' or 'gnu'.

The 'primary listing' (by which you mean ports category?) is irrelevant
to GNATS -- all ports categories are 'ports'.

> The java PR category should be used for ports that have the java category
> as their main listing. What do you think about that?

This would mean that to be consistent, we would have to add every other
ports category to GNATS.  This would be, at best, clumsy.

I'd much rather see all the ports PRs in one place, and preferably with
'<category>/<portname>' in their Synopses, so that one could search for
them in GNATS instead of portsmon being the only place where the
association from PR number -> portname is made (which is the case today).
For a while I tried to do that by editing Synopses but there are too many
for one single person to keep up with.

IMHO putting PRs about Java-based ports under 'java' would be a step
backwards.

mcl, with bugmeister hat on



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.LNX.4.44.0412060210210.10462-100000>