Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2000 12:42:41 -0300 From: "Mario Sergio Fujikawa Ferreira" <lioux@uol.com.br> To: Ade Lovett <ade@FreeBSD.ORG> Cc: Akinori -Aki- MUSHA <knu@idaemons.org>, asami@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG, yasuf@bsdclub.org Subject: Re: Call for a new virtual category: "ruby" Message-ID: <20000807124240.A14734@Fedaykin.here> In-Reply-To: <20000806200512.A452@FreeBSD.org>; from ade@FreeBSD.ORG on Sun, Aug 06, 2000 at 08:04:50PM -0500 References: <86og37a5jc.wl@localhost.local.idaemons.org> <20000806175148.D343@FreeBSD.org> <86zompvqgd.wl@localhost.local.idaemons.org> <20000806200512.A452@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, Aug 06, 2000 at 08:04:50PM -0500, Ade Lovett wrote: > On Mon, Aug 07, 2000 at 09:56:50AM +0900, Akinori -Aki- MUSHA wrote: > > Six. databases/ruby-postgres, japanese/rubytk, lang/irb, lang/ruby, > > x11-toolkits/ruby-gtk, and x11-toolkits/rubytk. > > Now I know there's minimal overhead in creating a new virtual > category, but to my eyes, 6 is somewhat on the low side. > > Perhaps we can come to some consensus on exactly how many ports > are needed for a virtual category. Once again this topic rises from the ashes. :) Not counting the language categories (ko, ...), we should not create virtual categories with less than the smallest category we already have: namely mbone (15 ports). Unless, of course, there is a very special need for that, e.g., a new mainstream programming language. :) My 2 cents, Mario Ferreira To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20000807124240.A14734>