Date: Tue, 16 May 2006 10:59:58 +0200 From: Tobias Roth <roth@iam.unibe.ch> To: Pav Lucistnik <pav@freebsd.org> Cc: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: New category - ports/packages specific tools? Message-ID: <20060516085958.GA24178@droopy.unibe.ch> In-Reply-To: <1147766584.14703.2.camel@pav.hide.vol.cz> References: <20060515222815.GA2535@picobyte.net> <20060516060651.GA52578@qlovarnika.bg.datamax> <1147766584.14703.2.camel@pav.hide.vol.cz>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, May 16, 2006 at 10:03:04AM +0200, Pav Lucistnik wrote: > Vasil Dimov píše v út 16. 05. 2006 v 09:06 +0300: > > > P.S. Pav: from the 61 currently existing categories 26 (43%) have less > > than 100 ports and 9 (15%) are smaller than the suggested one. > > I'd be happy to get rid of these small categories, in a greater scheme > to unclutter the /usr/ports. I have to somewhat agree. If you look at Gentoo for example (ok, last time I looked has been a while, maybe the situation has improved), there are far too many categories with fuzzy names. That makes it hard to find things. I propose: 1) keep the number of categories rather low, but 2) when discussing a possible new categorie, base this discussion on how much the new category can be differntiated from already existing ones. As an example, it is sometimes hard to differentiate between net and net-mgmt, however I think port-mgmt is a very good naming for a very distinct category of ports. 3) still keep a minimum number of ports as a requirement, but make that number rather low, say 20 or 30 cheers, Tobias
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20060516085958.GA24178>