Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2008 11:12:03 -0800 From: Greg Lewis <glewis@eyesbeyond.com> To: Daniel Rucci <dan@rucci.org> Cc: freebsd-eclipse@freebsd.org, pieter@degoeje.nl, glewis@eyebeyond.com.eyesbeyond.com, jonc@chen.org.nz, freebsd-java@freebsd.org Subject: Re: java/eclipse and jdk1.6 Message-ID: <20080226191203.GA81385@misty.eyesbeyond.com> In-Reply-To: <47BD6FDF.2070603@rucci.org> References: <20080219213031.GB85220@osiris.chen.org.nz> <20080220.103213.233678772.ken@tydfam.jp> <47BB8C82.2000909@buzmo.com> <20080220.131304.-345497826.ken@tydfam.jp> <47BBCDD8.4020305@buzmo.com> <47BD6FDF.2070603@rucci.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, Feb 21, 2008 at 07:34:39AM -0500, Daniel Rucci wrote: > Mike Bowie wrote: > >That sounds like a reasonable proposition and clearly it's a model > >already in use. IIRC, there was also mention previously of moving all > >of the "eclipse bits" to /usr/ports/eclipse... although it's late and > >the details escape me at this moment. I think perhaps Dan suggested > >it... I'll have to scan the archives. (Or someone can chime in.) > >Perhaps this is something that could be considered at the same time, if > >changes are being made. > > Well my 2 cents.. > > An argument against retaining java as the main category for eclipse and > most of its plugins. The porters handbook suggests using ports/java/ as > the main category for ports directly related to the java language [1]. A good argument for this is that it has lead to things like the Eclipse plugin for PHP (insert any language other than Java) being in the java category. Thats just plain ridiculous in my view. > With that said, the main category for the base eclipse ports would > probably go in devel. Ports like those related to sql/databases could > have their main category be set as database and the pydev eclipse > feature in python, etc. Agreed. > Although it follows the suggestion of the handbook, we are then losing > our neat folder containing _almost_ all of the eclipse ports, which > could be viewed as a regression. > > Checking how something like zope handles this, they mention zope as > their second category, this doesn't create a zope/ folder in my ports > directory but the category is created on the website so perhaps theres a > way to access this directly on the system as well. > > In any case, theres about 40 ports related to eclipse, it wouldn't be > the smallest category. > > Is there a guideline for what justifies a new category? The eclipse ports more than meet the criteria for creating a virtual category for them IIRC. I'm very much in support of moving them to their intuitive main category and giving them a virtual category of eclipse as the second (or later) category. FWIW... -- Greg Lewis Email : glewis@eyesbeyond.com Eyes Beyond Web : http://www.eyesbeyond.com Information Technology FreeBSD : glewis@FreeBSD.org
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20080226191203.GA81385>