From owner-freebsd-java@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Dec 6 08:20:43 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-java@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E46B416A4CE; Mon, 6 Dec 2004 08:20:43 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mail.soaustin.net (mail.soaustin.net [207.200.4.66]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8E53F43D5A; Mon, 6 Dec 2004 08:20:43 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from linimon@lonesome.com) Received: by mail.soaustin.net (Postfix, from userid 502) id 01163148FC; Mon, 6 Dec 2004 02:20:42 -0600 (CST) Date: Mon, 6 Dec 2004 02:20:42 -0600 (CST) From: Mark Linimon X-X-Sender: linimon@pancho To: Manfred Riem In-Reply-To: <37919c31041205145654f6ea3c@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII cc: java@freebsd.org cc: freebsd-gnats-submit@freebsd.org cc: Herve Quiroz cc: linimon@freebsd.org cc: Mario Sergio Fujikawa Ferreira Subject: Re: ports/74696: net/xnap: Remove crosslisting in java category X-BeenThere: freebsd-java@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting Java to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 06 Dec 2004 08:20:44 -0000 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 '/' 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