Date: Wed, 31 Aug 2005 09:02:34 -0700 From: Vizion <vizion@vizion.occoxmail.com> To: freebsd-java@freebsd.org Cc: Herve Quiroz <herve.quiroz@esil.univ-mrs.fr> Subject: Re: Eclipse as part of the ports/java tree? Message-ID: <200508310902.34681.vizion@vizion.occoxmail.com> In-Reply-To: <20050831155102.GA57775@arabica.esil.univ-mrs.fr> References: <20050831120023.56A8916A44A@hub.freebsd.org> <20050831072640.R83235@roble.com> <20050831155102.GA57775@arabica.esil.univ-mrs.fr>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wednesday 31 August 2005 08:51, the author Herve Quiroz contributed to the
dialogue on-
Re: Eclipse as part of the ports/java tree?:
>Roger,
>
>On Wed, Aug 31, 2005 at 07:48:43AM -0700, Roger Marquis wrote:
>> 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.
>
>As I already told David in a private mail, he seems to lack the proper
>understanding of the depth and complexity of the ports system.
I think you are right -- I do not understand its complexity and that is really
part of my point.
The priority is trying to find a method that works even if it means doing
something different. I agree we need to use the existing ports mechanism - I
do not agree with the almost quasi-religious notion that we cannot make
eclipse a category. If there is a good functional reason for making it a
category then fine -- and that would apply to any other candidate as well.
There is nothing sacred about categories.
However let me make it clear my btarget is not to achieve a category but a
means of having all eclipse plugins in a single directory.
If someone who understand the complexity of the ports system can figure that
out then we are home amnd dry.
>
>And as I stated in the forecited message to David, I will now focus on
>getting the 'java' category fully virtualized and begone from the
>freebsd-eclipse effort unless specifically asked for help. I have some
>other issues to tackle on my own.
>
>As a side note, I am already starting to find that the freebsd-eclipse@
>mailing list will have things even more difficult for the community to
>get commiters involved in the process.
>
>> 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.
>
>I agree with this. portsearch is such a great tool that I wonder why it
>has not yet found its way into ${PREFIX}/bin. We are flying away from
>the Java and Eclipse discussion here but since Mark (and his maintainer
>hat) is involved, I would like to suggest the idea to have such symlink
>created by sysutils/port-maintenance-tools.
>
>Herve
>_______________________________________________
>freebsd-java@freebsd.org mailing list
>http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-java
>To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-java-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"
--
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.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200508310902.34681.vizion>