From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Tue May 16 17:10:51 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.org Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DF9EF16AA2F for ; Tue, 16 May 2006 17:10:51 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jsunx1@bellsouth.net) Received: from imf17aec.mail.bellsouth.net (imf17aec.mail.bellsouth.net [205.152.59.65]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 121BD43D46 for ; Tue, 16 May 2006 17:10:49 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from jsunx1@bellsouth.net) Received: from ibm57aec.bellsouth.net ([68.221.1.61]) by imf17aec.mail.bellsouth.net with ESMTP id <20060516171048.BJQC28461.imf17aec.mail.bellsouth.net@ibm57aec.bellsouth.net> for ; Tue, 16 May 2006 13:10:48 -0400 Received: from localhost ([68.221.1.61]) by ibm57aec.bellsouth.net with ESMTP id <20060516171047.EOLV9336.ibm57aec.bellsouth.net@localhost> for ; Tue, 16 May 2006 13:10:47 -0400 Date: Tue, 16 May 2006 13:20:28 -0400 From: J To: freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.org Message-ID: <20060516172028.GA12500@brokedownpalace> Mail-Followup-To: freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.org References: <20060515222815.GA2535@picobyte.net> <20060516124509.GC59051@iib.unsam.edu.ar> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20060516124509.GC59051@iib.unsam.edu.ar> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i Cc: Subject: Re: New category - ports/packages specific tools? X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 16 May 2006 17:10:52 -0000 On 2006-05-16 (Tue) 09:45:09 [+0000], Fernan Aguero wrote: > +----[ Shaun Amott (15.May.2006 20:10): > | > | There are lots of nifty tools in ports for handling ports and packages. > | It would be nice if they were all in one, easy to find place. > | > | I think there are enough of these kind of ports to warrant a new > | category. What does everyone think about this? > | > | I'm not sure on a name yet -- "freebsd", "ports", "tools", and > | "portutils" are my initial ideas. > > I like the proposed ports-mgmt and portutils. > Hi. First post to a *BSD list. Not sure it's appropriate, but perhaps a new user viewpoint is applicable here (and I have to start somewhere). Like many others, I favor reducing the number of categories, starting with the small ones (though a few, like devel could profitably be split because there are over 2000 items). And of course a sense of a sensible minimum for consideration makes sense, but I don't think it should be a rigid numerical cutoff. A category like this is so (retrospectively) obvious, logical, and seems so beneficial that it seems a shoe-in. Also, since it's most helpful to new users, I don't think a virtual category would be so good. As mentioned, patching the various documents to explain virtual categories better would be a first step there. As far as adding to the list, some port management tools that don't have port in their names have been added in this thread, but I believe one is still missing. Some tool's home page explicitly states (tongue-in-cheek) that what sets it apart from other ports management tools is that it doesn't have 'port' in the name. Unfortunately, I can't remember what it is and STFW turned up nothing. (A good reason *to* have port in the name. :) ) Finally, I like portutils or something like that. Ports-mgmt is good - consistent, clear, etc., but I'd dodge a hyphen and a disemvowelment when a compound and general truncation will do. It's a stretch but 'mgmt' may not be immediately obvious to all, especially to the very new and to people whose first language isn't English. -J