Date: Mon, 05 Jan 2004 19:53:28 -0500 From: Tom McLaughlin <tmclaugh@sdf.lonestar.org> To: Joe Marcus Clarke <marcus@freebsd.org> Cc: FreeBSD GNOME Users <gnome@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: RFC: Restructuring GNOME meta-ports Message-ID: <1073350408.681.22.camel@compass> In-Reply-To: <1073346203.765.210.camel@gyros> References: <1073346203.765.210.camel@gyros>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, 2004-01-05 at 18:43, Joe Marcus Clarke wrote: > I was thinking maybe we should borrow something from garnome seeing as > since they've borrowed practically everything from us already ;-) (the > ports system, that is). What if we restructured the GNOME meta-ports to > look something like this: > ><snip> > > Thoughts? > > Joe This is a great idea Joe. Is this an attempt to give the FreeBSD gnome people a "distributor" role as linux distros do while the gnome people debate what should be included in the gnome core as well as what can be actively supported by them? Coming recently from linux to FreeBSD this is something that I miss with my desktop since many of the apps I've come to know and use came about based on what was in the gnome start bar or by word of mouth. Being a part of the real world now puts a serious dent in the amount of time I have to scour freshmeat or the ports collection for that apps I never knew I needed or never knew existed. I only discovered rhythmbox a few weeks ago because I was checking out someone's desktop screenshots for s+g. How open would the meta-ports be for change? As new programs arise and others mature, would requests for removals or additions be considered based on list reaction and what the maintainers feel appropriate? Thanks. Tom
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?1073350408.681.22.camel>