Date: Mon, 05 Jan 2004 22:04:54 -0500 From: Joe Marcus Clarke <marcus@FreeBSD.org> To: Adam Weinberger <adamw@FreeBSD.org> Cc: FreeBSD GNOME Users <gnome@FreeBSD.org> Subject: Re: RFC: Restructuring GNOME meta-ports Message-ID: <1073358294.43391.17.camel@shumai.marcuscom.com> In-Reply-To: <20040106015049.GM27144@toxic.magnesium.net> References: <1073346203.765.210.camel@gyros> <20040106015049.GM27144@toxic.magnesium.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--=-o3cWuwKdBgt+ovxfn5DK Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Mon, 2004-01-05 at 20:50, Adam Weinberger wrote: > >> (01.05.2004 @ 1843 PST): Joe Marcus Clarke said, in 1.9K: << > > 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 t= o > > look something like this: > >=20 > > x11/gnome2 (leave it the way it is) > > x11/gnome2-lite (leave it the way it is) >=20 > I would rather see an x11/gnome2-desktop port, and have x11/gnome2 be a > metaport for the Whole Damn Thing. Or, well... I think there should be a > meta meta port. This isn't very doable with the way the ports tree works now. How would you create a dependency chain? Would you force the lower meta-ports to install .keep_me files or the like? Personally, I think meta-ports of meta-ports are icky. >=20 > Also, I think that gnome2-lite could also perhaps be made to be a meta > meta port. >=20 > > x11/gnome2-fifth-toe (Will consist of the following): > > graphics/gthumb2 news/pan2 net/gnomeicu2 > > x11-toolkits/gnome-themes-extras sysutils/gkrellm > > graphics/gimp-devel www/bluefish-devel > > net/tsclient graphics/sodipodi > > security/seahorse ftp/gftp net/gossip > > audio/rhythmbox net/straw > > multimedia/totem mail/balsa2 > > irc/xchat2 net/gaim www/galeon2 > > audio/jamboree >=20 > is this list adhering to GNOME's specifications? cuz if not, I'm going > to put some suggestions below. Not anymore. This is a little more open. Again, I'm using garnome as a jumping off point. It seems to me, the default Fifth Toe has become bloated, and more or less useless for the majority of users. >=20 > > x11/gnome2-power-tools (New meta-port consisting of the following): > > devel/gnomevfs-extras sysutils/gnome-pkgview > > misc/quick-lounge-applet x11/gswitchit > > editors/dasher net/netspeed_applet > > editors/gedit-plugins deskutils/gdesklets > > net/gnomenetwork net/gnomenetstatus >=20 > what about epiphany-extensions? Good idea! >=20 > > devel/gnome2-hacker-tools (New meta-port consisting of the following): > > editors/mlview devel/gnomecommon devel/glade2 > > editors/ghex2 devel/regexxer editors/conglomerate > > devel/anjuta-devel texproc/meld >=20 > i do not like the names power-tools and hacker-tools. they are only > descriptive to certain groups of people. What's in a name? We can always make the pkg-descr for informative. >=20 > > deskutils/gnome2-office (New meta port consisting of the following): > > math/gnumeric2 deskutils/mrproject [planner] graphics/dia > > deskutils/glabels mail/evolution editors/AbiWord2 > >=20 > > Thoughts? >=20 > I'd like to consider some different organizations. >=20 > I'd like to see stuff broken down in ways similar to how the ports tree > does it. I think that all mail and news apps, for example, should be > kept together, and should be under a productivity heading that includes > the components listed above for gnome2-office, as well as things like > gimp and maybe bluefish. I disagree with you somewhat. I don't want to simply mirror the existing ports tree while giving it a GNOME flavor. Rather, I'd like to organize things into large bundles that offer [mostly] novice users a way of seeing what apps are "blessed" to work well with GNOME and fulfill a certain purpose. I do like the term, "Productivity," though. >=20 > I'd like to see an "extensions" category that contains additions to > other things. Things like applets, -extras, -extensions, > gnome-theme-extras, etc. Too vague, I think. I like the idea of adding epiphany-extensions to the broader power-tools (or whatever) category. I also think we should steer away from making tons of small meta-ports. We don't want to overwhelm our users. Not to beat a dead horse, but garnome uses these five meta-ports, and I think a low number like that is a good thing. >=20 > gnome2-h4x0r-t00lz i like though. still not thrilled with the name > though. We can certainly try to come up with a better name. And don't forget, we still have the COMMENT and pkg-descr to help users out. >=20 > I'd like to see maybe an entertainment category. Totem, rhythmbox, > xchat2, gossip, gnomeicu2, etc. Maybe a systemtools category that > contains gftp, gnomenetwork, etc. Dunno where all of this leaves gkrellm > and gdesklets, but I think that they should be in the same category. > Besides, gdesklets seems to be becoming more popular than gkrellm2, > development of which seems to have slowed to a halt. Cool. Pav also suggested a games meta-port (e.g. gnome2-toys). We should also not think of our new meta-ports as being set in stone. We should allow for flexibility. For example, as gdesklets matures, it could move from power-tools (or whatever) to the fifth-toe, etc. Joe >=20 > # Adam >=20 >=20 > -- > Adam Weinberger > vectors.cx >> adam@vectors.cx >> http://www.vectors.cx > magnesium.net << adamw@magnesium.net << http://www.magnesium.net/~adamw > FreeBSD >> adamw@FreeBSD.org >> http://people.freebsd.org/~adamw > #vim:set ts=3D8: 8-char tabs prevent tooth decay. --=20 Joe Marcus Clarke FreeBSD GNOME Team :: gnome@FreeBSD.org FreeNode / #freebsd-gnome http://www.FreeBSD.org/gnome --=-o3cWuwKdBgt+ovxfn5DK Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQA/+iXWb2iPiv4Uz4cRAhBYAJ9DNBR0RC8AEHqy4uZxPwvdTPxH7ACdE4yE 3m0SqkWleHON9R40/HNTkoA= =Td4n -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-o3cWuwKdBgt+ovxfn5DK--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?1073358294.43391.17.camel>