From owner-freebsd-java@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Aug 31 15:36:52 2005 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-java@freebsd.org 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 9C1A616A41F for ; Wed, 31 Aug 2005 15:36:52 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from vizion@vizion.occoxmail.com) Received: from lakecmmtao06.coxmail.com (lakecmmtao06.coxmail.com [68.99.120.82]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2931643D77 for ; Wed, 31 Aug 2005 15:36:46 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from vizion@vizion.occoxmail.com) Received: from dns1 ([64.58.171.82]) by lakecmmtao06.coxmail.com (InterMail vM.6.01.05.02 201-2131-123-102-20050715) with ESMTP id <20050831153646.WXFY24491.lakecmmtao06.coxmail.com@dns1>; Wed, 31 Aug 2005 11:36:46 -0400 From: Vizion To: freebsd-java@freebsd.org Date: Wed, 31 Aug 2005 08:32:43 -0700 User-Agent: KMail/1.8 References: <20050831120023.56A8916A44A@hub.freebsd.org> <20050831072640.R83235@roble.com> In-Reply-To: <20050831072640.R83235@roble.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200508310832.43657.vizion@vizion.occoxmail.com> Cc: Roger Marquis Subject: Re: Eclipse as part of the ports/java tree? X-BeenThere: freebsd-java@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting Java to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 31 Aug 2005 15:36:52 -0000 On Wednesday 31 August 2005 07:48, the author Roger Marquis contributed to the dialogue on- Re: Eclipse as part of the ports/java tree?: >Vizion wrote: >> I am now faced with the question is the ports tree as inflexible as some >> people suggest or are some members of our meritocracy more inflexible than >> the freebsd assets? > >What you see as inflexibility the rest of us see as structure. Sure >it would be nice to insert a goto on occasion but, from a long-term >perspective, the existing structure is better. > >Mark Linimon wrote: >> In your most recent email I think you are finally getting a lot closer to >> what I consider 'real' problem. IMHO the interesting problems you want to >> solve are the 'search' and 'browse' problems. > >This is a good point, and a legitimate issue. One solution might be >to move or symlink portsearch from /usr/ports/Tools/scripts to >/usr/local/bin. > >If consolidation is in order why not follow the p5- example/standard >and use the devel directory but rename the ports themselves to use an >appropriate prefix (ports/devel/eclipse{,_plugin}-$plugin)? The main problem is that to harness eclipse's own plugin loaderwe need to have plugins in their own directory. If we can achieve that then we use the standard eclipse *.jar files wiothiout modification and speed up the process of getting the plugins into the port tree. It is the sole directory issue that is the problem. -- 40 yrs navigating and computing in blue waters. English Owner & Captain of British Registered 60' bluewater Ketch S/V Taurus. Currently in San Diego, CA. Sailing bound for Europe via Panama Canal after completing engineroom refit.