Date: Wed, 31 Aug 2005 02:58:34 -0500 From: linimon@lonesome.com (Mark Linimon) To: Vizion <vizion@vizion.occoxmail.com> Cc: Mark Linimon <linimon@lonesome.com>, Herve Quiroz <hq@freebsd.org>, freebsd-eclipse@freebsd.org Subject: Re: How should eclipse be organized in the ports tree? Message-ID: <20050831075834.GA21200@soaustin.net> In-Reply-To: <200508301615.53251.vizion@vizion.occoxmail.com> References: <200508251303.59453.vizion@vizion.occoxmail.com> <200508301010.27373.vizion@vizion.occoxmail.com> <20050830212342.GA32240@soaustin.net> <200508301615.53251.vizion@vizion.occoxmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, Aug 30, 2005 at 04:15:52PM -0700, Vizion wrote: > /usr/ports/eclipse/eclipsemainv[x.xxx] Holds the main eclipse ports > /usr/ports/eclipse/meta-eclipse[v.xxx] Holds eclipse plugins loader > /usr/ports/eclipse/plugins/ Holds the *.jar files > /usr/ports/eclipse/misc1 self contained eclipse ports > /usr/ports/eclipse/misc2 > /usr/ports/eclipse/miscN This is certainly much closer to what is in the existing system (given that the jar files would probably better be in plugins/files/*.jar). The name 'meta-eclipse' would probably be less confusing to me personally as 'eclipse-plugins-loader' or something, 'meta' is a term that can mean everything or nothing. And if you change 'eclipsemainv' to just 'eclipseY.Z' and 'plugins' to 'eclipse-plugins' then that's very similar to what we have now. Then there's the matter of whether all this needs to be its own category but I don't think I am going to try to talk you out of that idea. I'm not too fond of it, personally. mcl
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20050831075834.GA21200>