Date: Sun, 2 Jun 2002 10:09:45 +1000 From: Edwin Groothuis <edwin@mavetju.org> To: "."@babolo.ru Cc: ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Splitting up ports. Message-ID: <20020602100945.B553@k7.mavetju> In-Reply-To: <200206012353.DAA28623@aaz.links.ru>; from "."@babolo.ru on Sun, Jun 02, 2002 at 03:53:01AM %2B0400 References: <20020602092819.A553@k7.mavetju> <200206012353.DAA28623@aaz.links.ru>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, Jun 02, 2002 at 03:53:01AM +0400, "."@babolo.ru wrote: > Edwin Groothuis writes: > > On Sun, Jun 02, 2002 at 03:15:03AM +0400, "."@babolo.ru wrote: > > > Brian Dean writes: > > > > On Sun, Jun 02, 2002 at 01:05:22AM +0400, "."@babolo.ru wrote: > > > > > And another end :-) of tree: > > > > > I propose to group dependant ports > > > > > in one ports directory to base port, for example: > > > > > ports/x11-wm/sapphire/sapphire > > > > > ports/x11-wm/sapphire/sapphire-themes > > > > > ports/x11-wm/sapphire/sapphire-another-themes > > > > > (no sapphire-another-themes in ports now) > > > > > See ports/38593 Three level ports: Patch and new ports > > > > > as another example with some patch. > > > > > > > > Sounds like a good way to tuck the over 700 p5-* ports into their own > > > > directory within each category. I.e., /usr/ports/devel/p5/*, etc. > > > Good point. > > > p5-* ports are not programs but modules > > > to expand given language (mostly?). > > > So hierarchy as > > > > > > ports/lang/perl5/archivers/... > > > ... > > > ports/lang/perl5/devel/... > > > ... > > > > IMO, keeping them sorted on functionality is more important. So > > ports/net/p5/... > > ports/mail/p5/... > > > > After all, they are already sorted in the categories "net perl" and > > "mail perl" where perl is only a administrative category and net > > and mail are the functional categories. > Let's look at any p5-* port. > For example ports/databases/p5-SQL-Statement > Assume I do something with SQL. > Need I in p5-SQL-Statement? No. never. > I need (may be) it ONLY if I program > something with perl5. You forget that the ports are sorted on their functionality, not on their requirements. So to counter your example, if I'm interested in database programming under perl, I'm not interested in the (insert random other usage for perl modules, like networking or XML processing) modules, but they would still be there. If you're interested in SQL, that's database related so you can find it in ports/databases (functionality!), there you can find in everything which is databases related, even other databases than the one you defined. Edwin -- Edwin Groothuis | Personal website: http://www.MavEtJu.org edwin@mavetju.org | Interested in MUDs? Visit Fatal Dimensions: bash$ :(){ :|:&};: | http://www.FatalDimensions.org/ 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?20020602100945.B553>